RIT Formula SAE Data Acquisition System

Senior Design Team 05109
RIT Formula SAE Data Acquisition System

Preliminary Design Report
Dr. Alan Nye

Coordinator/Faculty Mentor
Justin LaChausse – Project Leader

BS Mechanical Engineering, Auto Option
Robert Doll – Chief Engineer

BS Mechanical Engineering
Zach Bush
John Howard Jr.

Shuangbo (Bo) Xu
BS Electrical Engineering
Hsiang Chi (Sean) Hui

BS Electrical Engineering
RIT Formula SAE Data Acquisition System Team 05109
Table of Contents
1. RECOGNIZE AND QUANTIFY NEED 4

1.1. COMPANY BACKGROUND 4
1.2. TEAM MISSION STATEMENT 4
1.3. DAQ DESCRIPTION 4
1.4. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 4
1.5. SCOPE LIMITATIONS 4
1.6. STAKE HOLDERS 6
1.7. KEY BUSINESS GOALS 6
1.8. REQUIREMENTS 6
1.9. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 7
2. EXISTING ELECTRICAL SYSTEM ANALYSIS 9
2.1. OVERVIEW OF EXISTING ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 9
2.2. AREAS OF CONCERN 11
3. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT 12
3.1. DAQ CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT 12
3.1.1. DAQ CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 12
3.1.2. CONCEPT 1: “LONG LIST” 12
3.1.3. CONCEPT 2: “BASELINE” 16
3.1.4. CONCEPT 3/4: “INTERMEDIATE/HYBRID” 17
3.2. ELECTRICAL SYSTEM CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT 21
4. FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT 22
4.1. SYSTEM LEVEL ASSESSMENT 22
4.2. SENSOR LEVEL ASSESSMENT 24
5. PRELIMINARY DESIGN 28
5.1. ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 28
5.2. DAQ SYSTEM 33
5.2.1. THE HYBRID DESIGN 34
5.2.2. BRAKE SYSTEM 41
5.2.3. DRIVETRAIN 45
2
5.2.4. VEHICLE DYNAMICS 56

5.2.5. SUSPENSION 63
5.2.6. STEERING 71
5.2.7. CORNER LOADS 73
5.2.8. ENGINE 85
6. REFERENCES 91
Terminology
• DAQ – Data Acquisition

• SAE – Society of Automotive Engineers
• RIT – Rochester Institute of Technology
• RIT FSAE – Rochester Institute of Technology Formula SAE
• CDI – Capacitive Discharge Ignition
• CDS – Competition Data Systems Inc.
• SoC – State of Charge
• ECU – Engine Control Unit
• MAP – Manifold Air Pressure
3
1. Recognize and Quantify Need
1.1. Company Background

The Rochester Institute of Technology Formula SAE Racing Team is a group of
approximately twenty students dedicated to the design, fabrication, racing, and
promotion of a high performance formula-style racing vehicle. The all-volunteer
team is responsible for every aspect of the project including engineering design,
financial management, and public relations. Each year, the team builds an
entirely new racecar with restrictions only to the car’s frame and engine to
challenge the students’ knowledge, creativity, and imagination.
1.2. Mission Statement

Design, assemble, and implement a stand alone Data Acquisition (DAQ) System
for a Formula SAE racecar. Sensor outputs will be recorded and manipulated to
yield meaningful data about vehicle performance. Design emphasis will be
placed on system layout, sensor integration, and electrical system capability.
1.3. DAQ Description

A data acquisition system is defined as one or more electronic devices whose
primary purpose is to acquire data. Typically a data acquisition system involves
at least three main components. First, sensors respond to a physical stimulus and
transmit signals or change electrical property such as resistance. Second, a data
logger measures the electrical signal, converts it to a number and stores either that
value or some statistics on that value (average, maximum, minimum, standard
deviation, etc.). Third, a PC uses some communications link (serial port, phone
modem, radio modem, etc.) to retrieve the data from the data logger. The
resulting data is only as good as the sensors can measure and the data logger can
resolve. A stand-alone data acquisition system is one which can be completely
removed from the vehicle, without affecting the vehicle’s ability to run. Data
acquisition systems are commonly used by racing teams. The information
4
collected gives engineers, mechanics, and drivers useful feedback and data to
quickly and accurately gage, and improve the vehicle’s performance.
1.4. Product Description

Formula SAE is an intercollegiate design competition sponsored by the Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE). SAE is an international engineering society with
over 60,000 members worldwide, dedicated to the advancement of land, sea, air,
and space vehicles. During the four-day event, RIT competes among a field of
over 130 universities from across the globe, and is judged on the vehicle’s design,
cost, and performance, as well as the team’s ability to present the engineering
concepts used to develop the final design.
The challenge to the design team is to design and fabricate a prototype racecar
that can be manufactured on a limited production run for under $25,000 each. In
keeping with RIT FSAE’s tradition of innovation, competitiveness, and quality in
design, the team feels the need for a DAQ system for design verification, dynamic
tuning, and driver training assistance.
1.5. Scope Limitations

The DAQ System shall be initially designed by the end of Winter Quarter. At this
time, the following deliverables shall be presented during the Preliminary Design
Review:
• Needs Assessment
• Concept Development
• Feasibility Assessment
• Preliminary Design Overview
• Project Budget
• Spring Quarter Timeline
At the end of Spring Quarter the following deliverables shall be presented during
the Final Design Review:
5
• Functioning DAQ System

• Technical Drawing Package
• Operation and Training Manual
• Final Bill of Materials
• Final Design Overview
The Design Team shall not be responsible for the following:
• Design and Fabrication of Sensors
• Design and Fabrication of Vehicle Subsystems
1.6. Stake Holders

The primary stake holders are the current and future members of the RIT Formula
SAE Racing Team. Secondary stakeholders include the faculty and staff of the
Rochester Institute of Technology Mechanical Engineering Department.
1.7. Key Business Goals

The success of the project shall be determined by the following:
• Fully functioning, integrated Data Acquisition system
• Demonstration of usefulness (simple optimization) of the system
• The design package shall allow the system to be transferred to new cars in
the future with relative ease.
1.8. Requirements
1.8.1. Redesign DAQ System
1.8.1.1. Team shall use a CDS Commander II Data Logger.
1.8.1.2. Evaluate current system capabilities.
1.8.1.3. Determine feasible vehicle parameters to log.
1.8.1.4. Determine appropriate sensors for use.
1.8.2. Integration on Vehicle
1.8.2.1. DAQ system shall not interfere with operation of car subsystems.
6
1.8.2.2. Components must be completely removable without affecting the

vehicle’s ability to operate.
1.8.2.3. Optimize strength vs. weight of mounting pickups and sensors.
1.8.3. Electrical System Analysis
1.8.3.1. Determine current system loads without DAQ system.
1.8.3.2. Determine added load on system, with DAQ incorporated.
1.8.3.3. Optimize electrical system to increase excess capacity for DAQ
system and other potential electrical systems without negatively
affecting engine performance.
1.8.4. Demonstration of DAQ Capability
1.8.4.1. Demonstrate characterization of car capabilities
1.8.4.2. Demonstrate optimization of car characteristics
1.8.4.3. Document a procedure(s) used to demonstrate system capability
1.9. Financial Analysis

A $4500 budget has been proposed by the sponsor, RIT Formula SAE, for
implementation of a Data Acquisition System on the racecar. This budget
includes provisions for the following:
• Sensors, Wire, Connectors
• Laptop computer
• Raw materials for mounting brackets
We have been working with current sponsors of RIT Formula SAE, in an effort to
obtain product donations in the form of sensors, and electrical equipment. The
following is a detailed budget, outlining all purchases associated with our
preliminary design.
7
RIT Senior Design Team 05109 Budget

Subm itted by: Justin LaChausse Phone:x7001 Em ail: jal9846@rit.edu
Line # Vendor Description Item Total Line Total
Expenses
Equipment Purchases Under $1500

Supplies-Off ice (includes printing, copying, computer supplies) $ 50.00
Postage and Freight $ 75.00
Electrical w ire, connectors, heat shrink tubing $ 350.00
71551733 MSC (24) 0.220 Diameter/0.500 Thick Magnets $ 23.52
SEN-9 CDS 1-1000 psi Pressure Sensor $ 255.00
Tiger Direct Laptop Computer $ 700.00
MC5 CDS 4 mb Memory Card $ 575.00
Omega Strain Gauge Set $ 200.00
WBo2 2CO Tech Edge Wideband O2 Control Unit (includes w iring and connectors) $ 275.00
SEN-12S CDS (4) Strain Gauge Amplifiers $ 1,200.00 $ 3,703.52
Equipment Purchases Over $1500

COM2-30 CDS 24 Analog, 5 RPM Commander II Logger $ 4,250.00 $ 4,250.00
TOTAL EXPENSES $ 7,953.52
Income
Competition Data Systems Sponsorship $ 2,383.00

Discount on COM2-30 $ 2,180.00
10% off SEN-9 $ 25.50
10% off SEN-12S $ 120.00
10% off MC5 $ 57.50
RIT Formula SAE Project Sponsorship $ 1,000.00
TOTAL INCOME $ 3,383.00
TOTAL ACCOUNT STANDING $ 4,570.52
Table 1.9 – Project Budget
8
2. Existing Electrical System
2.1. Overview of Current System
Figure 2.1: Circuit Diagram of the RIT Formula SAE Race Car
The RIT Formula SAE race car is powered by a standard wet cell 12 volt battery.
The race car has several key electrical components, including:
• Starter Motor
• Autronic SM2 Engine Control Unit
• Autronic Capacitive Discharge Ignition Module
• Alternator
• Cooling Fan
• Fuel Pump
• Lights
9
The RIT Formula SAE Racing Team uses an Autronic SM2 Engine Management
System on their Honda CBR600 F2 motorcycle engines. This system is coupled
with an Autronic Capacitor Discharge Ignition System, providing power to the
ignition coils.
Autronic SM2 ECU Specifications

Microcomputer . Intel 16 bit running @ 16Mhz
Supply Voltage Normal operation 6.2V to 23V DC continuous
Safe limits +/- 24V (5 min)
+/- 80V alternator load dump (0.5 sec).
+/- 1000V inductive spike (10 usec)
Current Drain @ Engine idle < 1 Amp.
@ Max Engine < 16 Amp (less depending on injector type and
Load number.
CDI Specifications
Supply Voltage
Operational range 6.2 to 20 volts
Range for operation to 16000 rpm (8cyl) > 12 volts
Safe limits +/- 24 volts (5 min)
+/- 80 volts (alternator load dump 0.5 sec)
+/-1000 volts (inductive spike 10usec)
. <
Current Drain
Shutdown. < 10 uAMP
Engine stopped. < 200 mAMP
@ max spark rate. < 13 AMP
The current setup of the electrical system has not caused problems during races.
However, it has shown signs of extreme battery discharge, after long periods of
operation. As more electrical components are being added on to the race car, an
underpowered battery may cause some, if not all electrical parts of the race car
fail to operate. An analysis of the current electrical system shall be performed in
order to track down possible problems and free up room for more power for future
electrical parts.
10
2.2. Areas of Concern

Studies of the current system specifications have shown that several components
may be inducing a large current draw on the battery and charging system. These
components include the following:
• Cooling Fan
• Fuel Pump
• Capacitive Discharge Ignition (CDI)
• Starter Motor
Both the starter motor and cooling fan operate on non-continuous cycles, while
the CDI and fuel pump run continuously. The cooling fan is programmed to turn
on once the engine reaches a set operating temperature, and stays on until the
temperature is lowered below this set value. This means that the fan is operating
during the most vulnerable time for the electrical system, a high heat condition
where the vehicle is most likely running at its limit. While it draws a significant
amount of current, the starter motor is of minor concern since it draws this during
a very short time interval on startup.
11
3. Concept Development
3.1. DAQ Concept Development
3.1.1. DAQ Concept Development Process

From the initial needs assessment and sponsor requirements, the team
determined that it must design a system which utilizes a Competition Data
Systems Commander II Data Logger. Due to this fact, a focus was placed on
other aspects of the system, keeping the sponsor needs in mind. Concept
development of the DAQ system and sensors was completed concurrently.
Vehicular data needs were broken down into five categories including general,
brakes, chassis/suspension, drivetrain, and engine. From this, a list was
derived for each category of which types of data should be collected to best
characterize the vehicle subsystem. Brainstorming sessions were held, with
the focus on providing three possible system designs.
3.1.2. Concept 1 – “Long List”

Concept 1 is a compilation of every vehicle parameter which could be attained
using instrumentation. Broken down by vehicle subsystem, this allowed for a
starting point to develop more reasonable concepts.
3.1.2.1. General DAQ
o 20 Minute Logging
• Large Data Card
o Real-time Telemetry Transfer
• Incorporate wireless boards
• CDS telemetry transfer system
o Onboard Video System
• Remote mounted camera
• CDS data overlay system
• Lipstick Cameras
3.1.2.2. Brake Parameters
12
o Brake Bias
• (2) Line pressure sensors
o Rotor Temperature
• High Temp Infrared Pyrometer
o Pad Temperature
• Embedded thermocouple with amplifier
o Fluid Temperature @ Pad
• Thermocouple
o Caliper Stress/Deflection
• Strain Gauge to determine dynamic deflection
o Brake Torque
• Redesign Upright which will allow strain gauge to be calibrated to brake
torque
o Brake Pedal Travel
• Linear Potentiometer
• Rotational Potentiometer
o Brake Pedal Input Force
• Strain Gauge on Pedal
• Calculate based on pedal geometry
3.1.2.3. Chassis/Suspension Parameters
o Lateral/Longitudinal/Vertical Acceleration
• 3 axis accelerometer
o Yaw Rate
• Gyroscope
o Pitch Angle/Rate
• Use CDS Software calculations
• Laser Ride Height Sensors
• Trailing wheels
• Gyroscope
o Roll Angle/Rate
• Trailing wheels
• Gyroscope
13
o Steering Wheel Angle

• StringPot mounted on Steering Rack
• StringPot with Pulley on Steering Shaft
o Front Wheel Angles
• Calculation based on Ackerman Geometry and steering angle
o Damper Travel (Position)
o Corner Weights
• Load Cells in Suspension System
• Strain Gauges on Push/Pull rods with math using Motion Ratios
• Strain Gauges on Push/Pull rods with Calibration to Corner Loads
o A-Arm Loads
• Application of Strain Gauge
o Steering Input Torque
• Strain Gauge on steering shaft
o Ride Height
• Calculated in Software
o Tire Temperatures
• Infrared Pyrometers
o Tire Pressures (Dynamic)
• Wireless Pressure Sensors
o Shock Fluid Temperature
• Thermocouple
o Shock Reservoir Pressure
• Pressure Sensor
3.1.2.4. Drivetrain Parameters
o Front Wheel Speed
• Hall Effect Sensor
o Rear Wheel Speeds
o Differential Case Speed
o Driveshaft Torque
14
• Remote Torque Sensors

o Gear Lubricant Temperature
• Thermocouple
o CV Temperature
• Thermocouple
o Engine Output Torque
• Remote Torque Sensor
o Differential Case Temperature
• Infrared Pyrometer
3.1.2.5. Engine Parameters
o Engine RPM
• Hall Effect Sensor on Crank Pickup
o Throttle Position
• TPS Sensor
o Manifold Air Pressure
• MAP Sensor
o Oil Temperature
o Oil Pressure
o Water Temp in/out of Radiator
o Water flow through Radiator
o Airflow Through Radiator
o Air Temp into Radiator
o A/F Ratio
• Wideband O2 Sensor
15
3.1.3. Concept 2 – “Baseline System”

With Concept 1 outlined, the team focused on the opposite extreme, which
was to compile a list of essential vehicle parameters that would be needed to
achieve the goals outlined by the sponsor. This was set as the baseline
concept, and included only necessary data.
o 20 Minute Logging
• Large Data Card
o Brake Bias
• (2) Line Pressure Sensors
• 3 Axis Accelerometer
o Yaw Rate
• Gyroscope
o Roll Angle/Rate
• Trailing wheels
• Gyroscope
o Corner Weights
• Strain Gages on Push/Pull rods with math using Motion Ratios
• Strain Gages on Push/Pull rods with Calibration to Corner Loads
o Front Wheel Speed
16

o Rear Wheel Speeds
o Engine RPM
o Throttle Position
o Air/Fuel Ratio
o Manifold Air Pressure
3.1.4. Concept 3/4 – “Intermediate/Hybrid”

With two concepts in hand, the team was able to begin merging Concepts 1
and 2 into a more feasible design. It became clear from the start that some
vehicle parameters would not be feasible to attain with our current resources,
both financial and technical. During this brainstorming process, several ideas
began to emerge for ways to measure and derive certain vehicle parameters.
Due to limited resources, a focus was placed on making the most efficient of
the data collection requirements.
Compromises were made with respect to certain vehicle parameters, and the
team derived an intermediate concept, which included all of the parameters
included in the baseline system, with some extras as well. With Concept 3
(intermediate) created, the team began to assess the simultaneous logging
requirements presented, and compared this to the channel limitations of the
current Commander II setup. This assessment provided the team with the
conclusion that the current data logger did not offer the capabilities handle the
requirements of the intermediate concept, and thus would need to be
upgraded. With budgetary concerns rising, the team re-assessed the
simultaneous logging requirements and determined that a fourth concept
would be feasible. Concept 4 (hybrid) was developed under the premise that
the data acquisition system would be designed to be configured into several
17
setups, depending on testing goals. This includes a baseline competition

setup, which would require all necessary simultaneous data to be collected for
several runs in differing course layouts. In addition, provisions will be made
for specific testing setups, including an engine testing package, and brake
system testing package. These setups will be useful for collecting data which
is only required for design verification purposes, or for testing prototype
setups. For instance the engine testing package does not require the need for
suspension parameters such as corner loads, so these channels can be freed up
for use by other engine parameters during a test session. These additional
setups are made possible because channels assignments can be reconfigured
within the DAQ software, and setups can be saved for quick loading.
The following list includes simultaneous logging requirements, as well as

testing packages.
o 20 Minute Logging
• Large Data Card
o Onboard Video System
• Remote mounted camera
• CDS data overlay system
• Lipstick Cameras
o Brake Bias
• (2) Line Pressure Sensors
o Rotor Temperature
• High Temp Pyrometer
o Pad Temperature
• Embedded Thermocouple
• 3 Axis Accelerometer
o Yaw Rate
18
• Gyroscope
o Pitch Angle/Rate
• Derivative of Laser Ride Height Sensors
• Trailing wheels
• Gyroscope
o Roll Angle/Rate
• Derivative of Laser Ride Height Sensors
• Trailing wheels
• Gyroscope
o Corner Weights
• Strain Gauges on Push/Pull rods with math using Motion Ratios
• Strain Gauges on Push/Pull rods with Calibration to Corner Loads
o Ride Height
• Calculated in Trackmaster
o Tire Temperatures
• Infrared Pyrometers
• 1/2 Corners
o Front Wheel Speed
o Rear Wheel Speeds
19
o Driveshaft Torque
• Remote Torque Sensors
o Engine Output Torque
• Remote Torque Sensor
3.1.4.5.1. Permanent
• Engine RPM
• Throttle Position
• Manifold Air Pressure
• Gearing
• A/F Ratio
3.1.4.5.2. Summer Testing Package
• Oil Temperature
• Oil Pressure
• Water Temp in/out of Radiator
• Water flow through Radiator
• Air Temp into Radiator
• Exhaust Port Temperatures
• Collector Temperature
The hybrid concept began to emerge as the most appropriate design, factoring in
our financial and technological resources. This provided the team with a starting
point for finalizing the chosen concept, and moving into a feasibility assessment
of this design.
20
3.2. Electrical System Concept Development
The scope of this project requires us to assess the current electrical system,
determine how adding the data acquisition system will affect this system, and
make suggestions for future improvements. The first steps that were undertaken
were to obtain as much information about the current system as possible. This
included specifications for the engine control unit, wiring used, engine sensors,
and battery. From this, we were able to assess which components might be
causing large current draw on the system. From here, we developed a testing
procedure, using the engine dynamometer, to obtain measurements of electrical
loads on the system.
Measurement Method:
To measure the load of high output components, a simple voltmeter cannot be
used. This is due to the fact that standard voltmeters are not rated to handle
current beyond 10 amps. Thus, we proposed placing a high power resistor in
series with the component and measuring the voltage across it. Using Ohm’s law,
we may obtain the current draw through each component. After measuring the
current draw on each component, we can derive a more accurate representation of
the system model.
From initial measurements, the fuel pump draws 10 amps of current. The cooling
fan uses a maximum of 6.6 amps, while the CDI unit draws 2.9 amps when the
engine is running at max RPM. These three components account for the primary
power consumption of the vehicle. Unfortunately, there is little room to decrease
power drain from these electrical parts. Thus, our design focus will be primarily
on the battery and the charging system of the race car.
21
4. Feasibility Assessment
The first step in the feasibility assessment was the development of questions relating
to the concepts. Because there were three distinct aspects of our design, three sets of
questions were formed for the DAQ system level, sensor level, and electrical system
level covering the areas of technical, economic, scheduling, and performance
feasibility. With the questions determined, we were able to rate the concepts on a 1-5
scores with 3 being the baseline score with an approximate 50/50 probability of
completion, 1 being a concept area with a low probability of completion, and 5 being
a concept area with a high probability of completion.
4.1. System Level Assessment
For the system level assessment the questions were derived to choose which
Commander II Box setup will be used. The first box setup is running the current
setup on the car. The second setup is trading in the current box for one with more
capabilities, and the third setup is adding on a second box to augment the existing
capabilities. The questions used in the assessment are as follows:
Technology Questions
1. Does the team have the skills needed to implement this technology?
2. Does the team have the necessary resources to implement this technology?
3. Is this technology readily available to the team?
4. Does this technology stand alone from the rest of the car functions?
Economic Questions
1. Does the budget allow this box to be purchased?
2. Does the box allow for future expansion?
Performance Questions
1. Does the box add significant weight?
2. Are there enough channels to be fully functional?
Schedule
1. Can this box be integrated in time for verification/optimization?
22
Setup 1 Setup 2 Setup 3

Technology
Question 1 3 4 2
Question 2 3 3 3
Question 3 3 4 3
Question 4 3 4 4
Economics
Question 1 3 4 3
Question 2 3 4 4
Performance
Question 1 3 3 2
Question 2 3 4 4
Schedule
Question 1 3 4 2
Table 4.1 – System Level Feasibility Results
DAQ System Level Feasibility Assessment
TQ 1
4
SQ 1 3 TQ 2
1
PQ 2 TQ 3
0
Setup 1
PQ 1 TQ 4
Setup 2
Setup 3
EQ 2 EQ 1
Figure 4.1 – System Level Feasibility Assessment
This assessment led us choose box setup 2 (upgraded box). This will setup
seemed to be the most feasible in terms of our schedule, technological, and
financial resources. The main advantages of it over setup 3 (two boxes) start with
the fact that it is one central unit instead of two. Implementing two data loggers
would cause several problems. The data that is captured would have to be
exported, and manipulated to synchronize all of the signals with respect to the
same time intervals. With this done the data can no longer be viewed and
manipulated in the DAQ software, but would require several post-processing
23
steps before useful data could be analyzed. From an economic standpoint, we

determined it would actually be more expensive to purchase a second unit, than it
would be to trade in the current system toward the purchase of an upgraded
system. From a performance aspect a second box would not only add weight, but
would increase the complexity of the system wiring integration into an already
small area of packaging. After settling on the single upgraded unit design, we
determined that the most feasible option was to pursue the hybrid design. This
would allow us to save some money, by only upgrading to a 30 channel unit,
instead of a 38 channel unit. Due to the limited budget, we decided that it would
be best to invest the $1000 saved into other aspects of the design.
4.2. Sensor Level Assessment

At the sensor level, anything currently owned by the sponsor was not evaluated.
The sponsor has informed us they work fine and have no desire to replace them.
The remaining desired vehicle parameters left to be evaluated included those

which were not already present in the system owned by the sponsor. These were
assessed on two areas of concern. The first area was an evaluation of whether
each parameter was valuable enough to the sponsor to procure at this time, or at a
later date when more funding is available. The second area was to determine
which method of monitoring the parameter was to be used for the chosen system
design. The questions posed in this aspect of the assessment are as follows:
Technology Questions
1. Does the team have the skills needed to implement this technology?
2. Does the team have the necessary resources to implement this technology?
3. Is this technology readily available to the team?
4. Will this technology be compatible with the Commander II unit?
Economic Questions
1. Does the budget allow this sensor to be purchased?
Performance Questions
24
1. Does this sensor add significant weight to the vehicle?

2. Does the sensor provide accurate data for analysis?
Schedule Questions
1. Can this sensor be integrated in time for verification/optimization?
Technology Economics Performance Schedule

Sensor Type TQ 1 TQ 2 TQ 3 TQ 4 EQ 1 PQ 1 PQ 2 SQ 1
Onboard Video System
Remote Camera 3 3 4 1 2 3 2 3
CDS Data Overlay System 4 3 4 4 1 3 4 3
Lipstick Camera 3 3 4 1 2 4 2 3
Pitch/Roll Angle/Rate
CDS Software Calculations 3 3 4 3 3 4 2 3
Laser Ride Height Gages 4 4 4 3 1 3 4 3
Trailing Wheels 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2
Gyroscope 4 4 4 3 2 3 3 3
Steering Wheel Angle
String Dash Pot mounted on
2 4 4 4 4 4 4 2
Steering Rack
String Dash Pot with Pulley on
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Steering Shaft
Corner Weights
Strain Gages on Push/Pull rods with
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
math using Motion Ratios
Strain Gages on Push/Pull rods with
3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3
Calibration to Corner Loads
Ride Height
Laser Ride Height Gages 3 3 3 3 1 3 4 3
Calculated in Trackmaster 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3
Driveshaft Torque
Remote Torque Sensors 3 2 2 2 1 3 4 3
Table 4.2 – Sensor Feasibility Results
When analyzing the onboard video system concepts, the CDS Data Overlay
system stands out above all of the rest. This is due to the useful overlay of in car
data onto the video signal allowing for ease in driver training. Without the
overlay signal the video data, although useful, is no longer connected to the
dynamic data which has been recorded. Unfortunately, this proprietary system
available from CDS has a retail cost of $1350, making this economically
infeasible within our project budget.
25
Figure 4.2 - CDS Informer Video Data Overlay System
The pitch/roll angle and rate has an unclear winner. Laser sensors are perhaps the
most accurate method for determining instantaneous ride height; however their
main disadvantage lies in the cost. The next best alternative is by using
gyroscopes, oriented laterally and longitudinally at the vehicle’s center of gravity.
These will provide accurate data, and are slightly less expensive than laser ride
height sensors. However, cost considerations eliminate this possibility as well.
The software analysis provided by CDS has integrated math channels, which
calculate pitch and roll rate based upon suspension travel, and known geometry
constants. This however is not the most accurate way of measuring these
parameters. One final concept which we came up with was to build small trailing
wheels attached to potentiometers. These would then be attached to the chassis at
four points of the vehicle, and would move up and down, depending on chassis
attitude. The trailing wheels are very feasible to build and implement, but are also
not as accurate as other methods. In addition, they would be very fragile, and can
be damaged quite easily with any contact to an uneven road surface.
Steering angle and rate will be measured using a string potentiometer. There are
typically two ways to implement this device on a racecar. One method take
measurements of the steering rack travel, and the other is to take measurements on
the steering column. In our case, we have determined that the most appropriate
26
method is to take measurements on the steering column. This is due to packaging

constraints within the current chassis, as well as considerations for driver
interference.
The assessment of how to measure dynamic corner loads came down to

calibration accuracy. Our initial concept development provided us with two
methods of calibrating the strain gauges, which will be placed on the pull rods of
the vehicle. Calibrating the strain gauges to the actual measured strain on the pull
rods is by far the most accurate method. Using data obtained from suspension
kinematics software, a math channel can be created which relates the pull rod
force to actual normal load on each tire. This is much more accurate than trying
to directly calibrate the strain to normal wheel load, which can only be measured
in static settings.
Remote torque sensors are virtually the only method which can be used to
determine torque on the drive shafts. However, these sensors are extremely
expensive, costing as much as $19,000 for a set of two. It is for this reason that
we will not be able to implement these in our design.
The system and sensor level feasibility assessment provided us with several useful
clues, to move forward with evaluation of the preliminary system design.
27
5. Preliminary Design
5.1. Electrical System
Improvement Considerations
At this time we are still evaluating the current loads on the existing electrical
system. Some components such as the starter motor, rectifier, and cooling fan
draw large amounts of current, which cannot be measured with conventional
meters. Due to the limited resources available from the sponsor and the RIT
Electrical Engineering Department a new method was derived for taking such
measurements. We have ordered a one ohm 200-watt industrial resistor. The idea
is to place the resistor in series across the load, and measure the voltage drop.
The actual current value can then be derived from Ohm’s Law. Using Joule’s
Law, we determined the largest value of current which could be obtained from the
200W resistor is 14 amps. From our preliminary assessment we believe that 14
amps is a sufficient value for measurement
Ohm’s Law
of high output components such as the V=IR
cooling fan and the rectifier. Where: V is voltage measured in volts
I is current measured in amperes
Specifications provided by the fan R is resistance measured in ohms
manufacturer show that the fan draws 8

Joule’s Law
amps on average during normal steady-
P=I2R
state operation. The sponsors have Where: P is power measured in watts
I is current measured in amperes
indicated to us that the starter motor draws R is resistance measured in ohms
slightly more than 50 amps when cranking

the vehicle. Even though this value is quite high, it is drawn on a very small time
interval only at startup of the car.
The second phase of our analysis involves measuring the rate at which the battery
discharges and the charging rate with the current alternator and rectifier. The
method of finding the battery discharge rate is described in the following section.
The rate at which the alternator and the rectifier are supplying the battery can be
28
calculated from specifications of the rectifier and alternator. In all current

measurements, we have assumed that everything is in the worst case scenario,
meaning the engine is revving at high RPM and that it is drawing maximum
electrical loads in order to withstand the endurance race. If the alternator and
rectifier charging rates are less than the battery’s discharge rate, a few approaches
can be taken to remedy the situation. The first area to investigate is in battery
design. Several types of batteries are available, including NICAD, Lithium-Ion,
and Gel Cell. Each type has positive and negative features for use in this
application. Considerations which must be kept in mind are the high-heat
environment in which these batteries are placed, as well as discharge rate within
the electrical system. We are currently in the process of evaluating these features,
and analyzing which type is most feasible for a racecar application.
In terms of the charging system, the sponsor has indicated to us that the rectifier
has been running very hot during normal operations. It is essential that this
component operate within its designed temperature
range. The rectifier used by RIT Formula SAE is an
SH693-12 from a Honda CBR600F3 motorcycle. This
unit has molded fins, which act as a heat sink providing
some cooling. These rectifiers work well for stock
Honda SH693-12 Rectifier
applications like that of the CBR600 motorcycle.
However with the racecar application, added demands push the rectifier to its
operational limits. The reason for using the current rectifier is due to its
compatibility with the charging system in the engine. In an effort to balance
weight distribution of the vehicle, and keep the center of gravity as low as
possible, the battery has been placed inside the engine compartment, directly
behind the firewall. This placement locates the battery critically close to the
exhaust headers, in an area of high heat. We have hypothesized that excessive
heating from the exhaust may cause rapid discharge, thus greatly compromising
performance. We have suggested two solutions to this problem. One is to
insulate the battery from the heat and/or place the battery far away from the
29
exhaust. However, this may not be feasible due to packaging constraints within
the chassis structure.
A second solution would be to replace the battery with a different cell type, or
increased power. By definition, power is the rate of energy transferred. With
more power, there can be more energy transfer to different electrical parts of the
race car. This is readily obtained through the use of a larger battery. However, a
larger battery results in increased size and weight, which is an undesirable feature
for a race car application.
On a simple level batteries are purely energy storage devices, and thus need to be
constantly recharged. An adequate charging system must be in place to ensure
proper charging rate through the battery. The Honda CBR600F2 engine charging
system is an industry standard system, which works on the principles described
below.
F
i
g
u
r
e
2
:
T
h
r
ee Phase Rectifier Circuit (Source: http://www.allaboutcircuits.com)
The CBR600 uses separate a stator and rectifier to make up the charging system.
The stator, internal to the engine, converts the power from the gasoline engine
into three-phase alternating current. This 3-phase AC output is then converted
30
into DC by the external rectifier. This is then used to power system components,
and recharge the battery. Please refer to Figure 2 for a circuit diagram of a 3-
phase rectifier unit. A three-phase rectifier is used to account for the AC output
from the stator.
The amount of current generated by the charging system of the racecar is directly
related to the RPM of the engine. As long as the charging rate is higher than the
battery discharge rate, the system will continue to operate with no performance
degradation. To quantify the battery discharge rate, we can check the battery’s
state of charge (SoC) after the surface charge is removed. If the battery’s SoC is
consistently above 95%, then the charging system is fully recharging the car
battery. Measurement of SoC consists of the use of a hydrometer.
Measurement of SoC:
A hydrometer (as shown in figure 3) is an inexpensive float-type device used to
measure the concentration of sulfuric acid (Specific Gravity) of battery electrolyte
("battery acid"). From this reading you can easily and accurately determine a non-
sealed battery's State-of-Charge. A hydrometer is a glass barrel or plastic
container with a rubber nozzle or hose on one end and a soft rubber bulb on the
other. Inside the barrel or container, there is a float and calibrated graduations
used for the Specific Gravity measurement.
Figure 3: Hydrometer (source: popular mechanics)
31
1. Remove the surface charge

2. Start with the cell closest to the positive terminal. Squeeze the rubber bulb and insert it into
the electrolyte. Then release the bulb. Electrolyte will be sucked up into the barrel allowing
the float to ride freely.
3. Squeeze the rubber bulb to release the electrolyte back to the cell.
4. Repeat the process several times to get a more accurate reading.
5. At eye level and with the float steady, read the Specific Gravity at the point the surface of the
electrolyte crosses the float markings.
6. In the case where the hydrometer is not temperature compensating. Then compensate the
reading using the Table 1. Otherwise, take the reading from Table 2.
7. Repeat the process for each cell and average them to get SoC.
8. Rinse the hydrometer thoroughly after finish.
Electrolyte Electrolyte Add to Add to

Temperature Temperature Hydrometer's Digital
Degrees Degrees SG Reading Voltmeter's
Fahrenheit Celsius Reading
120° 48.9° +.016 -.013
110° 43.3° +.012 -.011
100° 37.8° +.008 -.008
90° 32.2° +.004 -.005
80° 26.7° 0 0
70° 21.1° -.004 +.007
60° 15.6° -.008 +.016
50° 10° -.012 +.028
40° 4.4° -.016 +.044
30° -1.1° -.020 +.062
20° -6.7° -.024 +.084
10° -12.2° -.028 +.108
0° -17.8° -.032 +.134
Table 1: State of Charge, temperature compensation
32
Digital Approximate Approximate Hydrometer Approximate

Voltmeter State-of-Charge Deep-of- Average Electrolyte
Open at Discharge at Cell Freeze Point
Circuit 80°F (26.7°C) 80°F (26.7°C) Specific
Voltage Gravity
at Rest
12.65 100% 0% 1.265 -77°F
(-67°C)
12.45 75% 25% 1.225 -35°F
(-37°C)
12.24 50% 50% 1.190 -10°F
(-23°C)
12.06 25% 75% 1.155 15°F
(-9°C)
11.89 or DISCHARGED 100% 1.120 or 20°F
less less (-7°C)
Table 2: Low maintenance battery state of charge
5.2. DAQ System
Our feasibility study provided us with several useful clues which pushed us
toward the chosen design, a hybrid concept based upon efficient use of hardware
resources. Once the list of vehicle parameters was finalized, the team met with
the sponsor to determine which data needed to be obtained simultaneously. This
was a critical factor in determining whether or not the team could use the existing
20 channel logger, or if we needed to upgrade to a unit with more capability.
Initial indications were that the system would require a 38 channel logger.
However, after reviewing the simultaneous data collection requirements, the team
determined that it would be acceptable to use a 30 channel unit. This was made
possible with the creation of the hybrid design, which allowed for two data
acquisition packages: an overall competition setup, and a secondary testing setup.
33
5.2.1. The Hybrid Design
Overall Competition Setup

The overall competition setup incorporates all simultaneous logging needs
into a single configuration. This configuration uses 5 RPM and 24 analog
channels.
Hybrid Concept Channel Configuration
Analog Channel Overall Competition Setup Secondary Testing Concept

1 Front Brake Line Pressure Front Brake Line Pressure
2 Rear Brake Line Pressure Rear Brake Line Pressure
3 Front Brake Rotor Temperature Steering Angle
4 Rear Brake Rotor Temperature Lateral Acceleration
5 Front Brake Pad Temperature Longitudinal Acceleration
6 Steering Angle Vertical Acceleration
7 Lateral Acceleration Yaw Rate
8 Longitudinal Acceleration Left Front Shock Travel
9 Vertical Acceleration Right Front Shock Travel
10 Yaw Rate Left Rear Shock Travel
11 Left Front Shock Travel Right Rear Shock Travel
12 Right Front Shock Travel Left Front Pullrod Load
13 Left Rear Shock Travel Right Front Pullrod Load
14 Right Rear Shock Travel Left Rear Pullrod Load
15 Left Front Pullrod Load Right Rear Pullrod Load
16 Right Front Pullrod Load Throttle Position
17 Left Rear Pullrod Load Manifold Air Pressure
18 Right Rear Pullrod Load Air/Fuel Ratio
19 Throttle Position Oil Temperature
20 Manifold Air Pressure Water Temperature Inlet
21 Air/Fuel Ratio Water Temperature outlet
22 Flow rate through radiator
23
24
RPM Channel
1 Front Wheel Speed Front Wheel Speed
2 Left Rear Wheel Speed Left Rear Wheel Speed
3 Right Rear Wheel Speed Right Rear Wheel Speed
4 Differential Housing Speed Differential Housing Speed
5 Engine RPM Engine RPM
34
The CDS Commander II
The Commander II Data Acquisition System is a stand-alone unit

manufactured by Competition Data Systems Inc. This is an attractive system
for RIT Formula SAE due to its low cost, flexible configuration, and high
accuracy. The system is powered by 12 volts from the main power of the
vehicle. Interfaced sensors are operated by 5V and 12V excitation, supplied
from the Commander II. Data is then fed back into the Commander II on a 0-
5V DC scale. A removable Type II or III PCMCIA memory card is used to
transfer data from the command module to a PC, where it can then be
analyzed using the Track Master 2000 software.
12V DC
Main
Vehicle
Commander II PC
Data Acquisition Track Master
Module 2000
T
hSensors
e
team chose to design the data acquisition system around a COM2-30 unit,
which is a 5 RPM, 24 Analog Channel system. This was chosen on the basis
of simultaneous data collection requirements, and it’s compatibility with the
current system owned by RIT Formula SAE. We have worked closely with
Competition Data Systems, who have provided us with a generous trade-in
value of the old Commander II, towards the purchase of a new COM2-30.
One requirement placed on the team by the sponsor was that the system be as
lightweight as possible, and be robust. This unit affords the team both of
these options. The Commander II is housed inside of an extruded aluminum
35
case, weighing just 1lb. This case has four rigid mounting points, with which
anti-vibration mounts can be attached. One negative feature of this system is
that the unit is not waterproof. This fact was taken into consideration when
deciding on placement of the unit in the racecar. The team decided it would
not be ideal to locate the unit on any area of the vehicle that was subject to
damage during a collision. In addition, any location that is subject to rain or
snow would not be acceptable. This left two possible locations for mounting
the control unit: inside the cockpit, or under the front nose bodywork.
Cockpit space is highly optimized by the designers at RIT Formula SAE, and
thus no suitable location could be found here. A decision was made to mount
the unit in a piggy-back configuration on top the ECU, underneath the nose of
the vehicle. This is an ideal location, as it protects the unit from weather, and
also provides safety in the event of a crash. The unit will be housed fully
within the chassis tubular structure. This location also provides for efficient
routing of all necessary wiring. Wires can be routed along with the main
wiring harness, which feeds the ECU and dash. One consideration that was
taken into account when choosing this location was the access to the memory
card download port. Ideally, the team would like to be able to have quick
access to the port, without removing body panels. However, after an
evaluation of the driving patterns of RIT Formula SAE, it was determined that
placement under the nose would be acceptable. Since most testing is
performed without bodywork in place, the team would have quick and easy
access to the port. The only times in which the body would need to be
removed for data download would be in a competition setting, where this
could take place in the pit area after each individual run.
Track Master 2000

Features:
Track Master 2000 is the bundled software package which accompanies the
Commander II. This software is available for Windows 95, 98, 2000, and XP,
and offers several user configurations. This allows the user to analyze data in
36
any way they choose, using X-Y plots, signal vs. signal plots, map plots,
suspension animation displays, histograms, bar graphs, numeric displays, and
driver controls graphics. This provides for quick analysis, without having to
sort through raw data. However, for detailed analysis, data can be exported
via a .cds file, which can then be opened in other analysis programs such as
Microsoft Excel and Matlab. The software has the ability to generate track
maps through the yaw rate gyro or accelerometer, and plot driver control
displays of the steering wheel movement, braking force, and acceleration
force. This is extremely useful for driver training and feedback, as the driver
can review his laps, and reference points in which he slowed prematurely, or
was on or off the throttle.
One other desirable option that is available in Track Master 2000 is the ability
to create user math channels, and edit preset math channels. This allows for
quick analysis to be performed entirely within Track Master 2000, without the
need to export data to Excel or Matlab. This is extremely useful for testing
37
sessions where a variety of changes are being made to the vehicle to verify a
setup, or tune for a specific event.
How Data is Recorded in Track Master 2000

Track Master 2000 uses the coupled software program Command Link to
create sensor calibration and car files, which the Commander II then uses
when recording. Command Link is the main communication interface
between the Commander II, and the PC. This program is used to create a .car
file, which included all necessary vehicle parameters and channel
assignments. This is the interface in which suspension geometry, gearing, tire
rollout, and other vehicle constants are entered. Sampling rates and resolution
are set within the channel configuration window, for each analog and digital
RPM channel.
This program is also used to provide sensor calibration to the Commander II.
Once a .car file is created for the vehicle and the sensors have been calibrated
properly, the file can be loaded onto the removable PCMCIA Memory card.
Communication is also provided through a serial port connection from the PC
to Commander II. This allows the upload of .car file data, download of data,
38
or the ability to view live readings from the sensors. Data collection can be
triggered by a user presets, or by a manual on/off switch. For example, if we
wish to warm up the car before a run, then begin recording once a set speed is
reached, this can be programmed into the .car file. Conversely, we can
manually select when to begin recording via the on/off switch located on the
dash.
General Design Considerations

The overall design goal is to provide a competent, lightweight, robust,
accurate, and financially feasible data acquisition system for the RIT Formula
SAE racecar.
Electronic data acquisition equipment, in general, is significantly expensive

and fragile. Significant care is required to outfit such equipment to the harsh
environment of a racecar. The system must operate properly and reliably in
all conceivable environments. Competition weather ranges from extremely
hot (air temperature 40 deg C and track temperature 100 deg C) as seen in
Australia to cold (air temperature 5 deg C) as can be seen in Detroit. The
team competes in wind, rain, hail, and high dust conditions. On the Formula
SAE vehicle, vibration is major consideration. With the engine/transmission
solidly mounted to the chassis and spherical bearings at all suspension points,
a wide range of vibration passes through the sprung and unsprung masses of
the vehicle. Electrical noise, especially from the charging and ignition
systems, is a further concern. It would be optimal to protect each sensor from
contact with stones, other track debris, or plyon contact. In Formula SAE, the
race tracks are marked by pylons, and RIT generally contacts a number of
them throughout practice and competition. Occasionally, cones become
wedged into the suspension system presenting a serious threat of damage,
especially to delicate sensors. Collisions with other racecars or track barriers
present yet another threat of mechanical damage.
39
The team and the data acquisition system are responsible for upholding the
RIT Formula SAE tradition of excellence. RIT prides itself in producing a
high quality product from initial mechanical design through machining and
fabrication to final fit and finish. The data acquisition system and all
components will be used on the racecar during competition, so the integration,
packaging decisions, and design quality must be world class. Minimizing
weight is a paramount concern. Preferably, the system will utilize existing
fasteners for mounting and minimize the number of additional parts.
To meet these challenges, general design guidelines were followed throughout

the system. All components must be water/weather-proof or mounted in a
guaranteed dry location. Rubber vibration isolation mounts must be used
where appropriate. All fasteners and mounting hardware must be secured
from unintentional loosening by a positive locking mechanism – nylon lock
nut, prevailing torque lock nut, cotter pin, safety wire, or Loctite threadlocker.
Each piece of equipment will be mounted with brackets of reasonable
stiffness/strength. Sensors and boxes should be located with consideration of
protection from mechanical damage and elegance of packaging. Electrical
noise will be countered with shielded data cabling and appropriate hardware.
Sensor sampling rates are of significant importance due to limited on-board

memory capacity. We are still evaluating the individual sampling rates
required by each sensor.
Sensor Connections and Cabling

Two areas for improvement of the existing system are cable length, cable
construction, and cable connections. CDS systems are built standard with
Switchcraft EN3 Weathertight Series Connectors. These are both 5 pin and 8
pin, male and female waterproof connectors, which are used at the sensor to
main cable connection points. These connectors are military standard 202
rated for shock, vibration, moisture resistance, and insulation resistance
40
characteristics. One downside is their high cost, at around $7 each for the 8-
pin option. This quickly adds up when designing a system which operates
20+ sensors. However, after evaluating possible replacements, a decision was
made to stay with the Switchcraft connectors. This will ensure that all
connectors on the system will remain the same, as per the previous design.
Commander II system wiring is provided by jacketed, shielded 22 awg signal
cable. It is imperative that each wire is shielded to reduce noise and
disturbance in the system. The cable insulation is also rated to withstand
temperatures as high as 200 degC. This is a much needed feature for RIT
Formula SAE, where temperatures can rise to above 100C inside the engine
compartment. All wiring for the data acquisition system will be built in house
at RIT, in conjunction with the mounting of sensors and main vehicle wiring.
This will ensure that each cable is built to the exact length need to reach its
associated sensor. This will cut back on un-needed lengths of cables, and
reduce the overall weight of the system.
5.2.2. Brake System
Sponsor Needs:
In an effort to design a highly efficient braking system, the RIT Formula SAE
Team has found the need to monitor several parameters of the braking system.
After assessing the feasibility of needed parameters, a decision was made to
monitor and collect data for the following:
• Front Brake Line Pressure
• Rear Brake Line Pressure
• Front and Rear Pad Temperature
• Front and Rear Rotor Surface Temperature
Dynamic brake pressure measurements are extremely useful for setting and
tuning the braking force distribution between the front and rear. This “bias”
must be tuned for each driver to ensure proper handling under braking
conditions. In the past this tuning was done on the basis of driver feedback
41
after a practice session. However, without being able to quantify the actual
bias distribution, no optimal settings were attained. In addition to setting the
bias distribution, the team must be able to quantify the actual pressures
present in the system lines. From this, the team can quantify the input forces
present on the brake pedal, and clamping forces at the pad/rotor interface.
Working in conjunction with chassis sensors, this brake sensor package will
enable the team to understand the pad/rotor temperature relationship to pad
coefficient of friction and thus braking force. This will allow quantitative
evaluation of different pad materials as well as controlled durability testing.
The team will also know the actual braking loads experienced in service,
which can then be used to optimize component design.
Pad coefficient of friction can be calculated by the following method:
(Milliken, 685)
Where:
∆Wx is the change in rear axle normal load (lb)
h is the height of the center of gravity (in)
l is the vehicle wheelbase (in)
a is the distance from front wheel centerline to cg (in)
42
b is the distance from rear wheel centerline to cg (in)

W is the mass of the racecar (lb)
Ax is longitudinal acceleration (g)
∆Wx will be provided at each time step by the corner load sensors. The rest
of the inputs (h, l, a, b, W) are known from measurement. The following
calculation will yield the braking deceleration, Ax:
∆Wx
Ax =
⎡h ⎤
⎢⎣ l * W ⎥⎦
Knowing the normal load on each axle and the deceleration, we can calculate
the longitudinal braking force on each axle, since this force must be
distributed according to the normal load on the axles. Thus, we have the
longitudinal force on each tire. An implied assumption here is a constant tire
to surface coefficient of friction for each tire. Multiplying by the loaded
radius of the tire yields braking torque, which can easily be converted into a
tangential caliper force using the rotor effective radius. Caliper clamping
force is known via line pressure and thus, using Coulomb friction, we can
obtain the pad-rotor coefficient of friction. The pad-rotor coefficient will be
calculated at each time step and plotted vs. rotor or pad temperature.
Heat is a major problem faced when designing a brake system. It is for this
reason that the RIT Formula SAE Team must be able to have a working
knowledge of the operating temperatures of certain system components.
Brake pad and rotor temperatures can be monitored to determine the
temperature range achieved under certain loading conditions. Correlating
these temperatures to deceleration rates provides a great indication of peak
operating values. In addition, heat dissipation with respect to time can be
quantified.
43
Data Acquisition Solution:

Front and rear brake pressures can be obtained quite easily using a pressure
transducer. However, careful considerations must be made to ensure that the
internal components of the sensor are compatible with highly corrosive brake
fluid. In addition, the sensor must be capable of handling pressures in excess
of 1000 psi. The formula team currently owns one SEN-9G pressure sensor,
which is a 0-1500 psi wet fluid sensor supplied by
Competition Data Systems. This is an
instrumentation grade sensor that is brake fluid and
fuel compliant. In addition, it is readily available for
under $300. After researching possible alternatives, SEN-9 Fluid Pressure
we found that it would not be feasible to purchase any competitive sensors.
Our two main concerns centered on accuracy relative to the current CDS
sensor, and the high cost of a replacement. By using the CDS sensor, and
purchasing another that is exactly the same, we assumed that both will be
manufactured by the same company, and thus have similar response
characteristics. In addition, the 0.5% accuracy is well within the bounds of
the team’s requirements. The RIT Formula SAE racecar uses two AP Racing
Master Cylinders to provide braking force to both the front and rear wheels.
Brake fluid is transferred through 0.1875” outside diameter 5052 aluminum
tubing, running along the chassis structure of the vehicle. The two sensors
will be teed off this hard line on the floor of the foot box, where they will be
rigidly mounted to the tubular structure. Wiring will run parallel to the brake
over-travel switch wire, and will be fastened to the upper frame member with
high tensile strength nylon cable ties. The sensor arrives from the
manufacturer with 2-point calibration values and has a 0 to 5 volt linear
output.
Extensive research was done to determine an accurate way to quantify

dynamic rotor temperatures. It became very clear early on in our research that
the only way to ensure a reasonable measurement was through the use of an
44
infrared device. In the past RIT Formula SAE has experimented with
temperature sensitive paints, placed on the rotor surface in an area outside of
the pad interface. This did provide a general estimate of the peak temperature
range seen by the rotors, but was very inaccurate. In addition, the peak
temperature value could not be correlated to point in time, nor compared to a
known deceleration rate. In an effort to obtain this correlation, we have
proposed using narrow angle infrared temperature sensors. These sensors can
be purchased in a variety of configurations, which can handle various
temperature ranges. One disadvantage however is the high cost associated
with these sensors. These sensors output a millivolt signal, and thus require
an amplifier, which increases the cost.
Brake pad temperature is a primary concern for verification of assumptions

made in the heat transfer calculations performed by the brake group. After
brainstorming, we have concluded that the best solution for obtaining these
measurements would be embedded thermocouples on the pad backing plate,
and output their signal to an amplifier which can then feed the Commander II.
However, this can be a complex system to construct, as several wires will
need to run into the calipers, which is a high heat environment. In addition,
the thermocouples will need to be permanently affixed using a high
temperature resin or adhesive. While this has manufacturing complexity, the
overhead costs associated with this design are quite low.
5.2.3. Drivetrain
Sponsor Needs:
Primary data collection requirements for the drivetrain of the RIT Formula
SAE racecar include output torque on both left and right drive shafts. This is
due to the operation of the Zexel Gleason Torsen Type II differential. The
Type II is a limited slip differential that is torque, not speed, sensitive.
Monitoring drive shaft torques will yield the torque-bias ratio (TBR) of the
differential. The TBR can then be tuned through mechanical means inside the
45
differential to produce the smoothest power delivery and maximum traction

on corner entry and exit. Also, knowledge of differential reaction time would
be helpful in understanding and optimizing the transient operation of the
differential, both under acceleration on corner exit and under trail braking on
corner entry. In order to obtain this data, one torque sensor would need to be
placed on each drive shaft. The racecar would then be driven through the
series of corners the team is likely to experience at competition, and its
performance accordingly tuned. It would even be possible to tune differential
characteristics for each separate competition event. Another benefit of the
torque sensor is the knowledge of actual dynamic driveshaft loading for
design purposes. Under conditions of zero wheel slip, the sum of the left and
right side torques yields engine output torque.
The torque sensors required for our application are available commercially but
are extremely expensive (approximately $20,000) due to their size and
complexity of design. Thus, after evaluating the priorities of the RIT Formula
SAE Racing Team, and factoring in the high cost, we determined that it was
not feasible at this time to directly measure the torque on each drive shaft.
However, even without knowing the torque on the shafts, some useful data
can be obtained by monitoring drivetrain rotational speeds. By placing speed
sensors on the left and right rear wheels and the differential housing itself, we
can quantify the differences in rotational speed between these three
assemblies. This is useful when evaluating where in the corner the differential
is locked and where it is freely differentiating. One area of concern for the
Formula SAE Team is determining where the differential locks up on corner
entry, both under a coasting scenario and a braking scenario.
These rotational speed sensors are also useful for quantifying the amount of
rear wheel spin. This can be done by placing another rotational speed sensor
on a single front wheel and plotting the relationship between front and rear
wheel speeds. Of particular concern is the time delay at the start of an
46
acceleration run, when the rear tires have lost traction and are spinning freely.
In order to produce the fastest run, rear wheel spin must be minimized.
Preferably, the tire is held at its maximum traction capability – the peak of the
longitudinal slip curve. By knowing the relationship between front and rear
wheel speeds versus time, the team can better analyze acceleration run
launching techniques and work to minimize wheel spin. This data can then be
used to tune the traction control system, which will cut spark from the engine
as a function of percent wheel spin. The traction control system will utilize
signals from these same rotational speed sensors.

The team has limited options for rotational speed sensors, as the CDS logging
box will only accept a 0 to 5 volt digital signal. This pointed us toward some
type of Hall Effect speed sensor. A Hall Effect sensor detects
changes in the magnetic flux produced when a ferrous target
passes over the sensor. A Hall Effect sensor has several
advantages over other types of speed sensing devices, namely
Source: Cherry Electrical high accuracy at low speeds and integrated signal processing
electronics. Hall Effect sensors are readily available at relatively low cost.
Due to packaging constraints, we needed to find a sensor that would be small
enough to fit within the confines of the wheel and suspension, and still
provide a high accuracy reading. Keeping weight, size, and price in mind, we
settled on a Bosch HA-P speed sensor for collection of wheel speed data.
This sensor was chosen for its small size and robust design. These sensors are
specifically designed for harsh environments, and have been used by RIT
Formula SAE for engine crank and cam position on their race engines. There
is no need to calibrate this type of sensor, however, a strobe light will be used
to confirm sensor output. The sensor is very easy to mount with bolt-on
connection, via a reinforced high strength plastic housing. In addition,
electrical connections are completely waterproof, which is of paramount
concern for wet weather driving. Sensor excitation will be provided by MAG-
47
MATE™ round rare earth magnet material. This nickel-plated corrosion-

resistant permanent magnet is available at MSC Industrial Supply for $0.98
each.
Front Wheel Speed Sensor
Front Outboard Suspension Assembly

(data acquisition components highlighted in green)
48
Detail View
The front toning wheel will be CNC machined from AZ31B magnesium plate.
The MAG-MATE™ magnets are located by radial holes and permanently
retained by an aircraft-quality structural bonding agent, Hysol. This type of
assembly offers minimum weight and optimal sensor performance. It is
critical that the magnets be evenly spaced around the toning wheel, as even a
1 degree error will cause inconsistency in the data. The toning wheel-magnet
assembly will be mounted to the inboard wheel bearing jam nut via tapped
holes and 6-32 alloy steel cap screws. An additional requirement imposed by
the team was that any rotating masses be symmetric such that it is rotationally
balanced.
Magnets were chosen for targets as opposed to the traditional plain steel.
Since the Hall Effect sensor works based on the change in magnetic field
caused by the targets, the stronger magnetic field offered by a magnet allows
the sensor to be run at a larger gap than does a steel target. The gap between
the Hall Effect sensor face and the target is critical for ensuring reliability of
the readings. The recommended air gap for steel targets is .040 to .060 inches.
Wheels with magnet targets can run a gap as large as 0.180 inches. The larger
49
gap allows more margin to compensate for fabrication tolerance, toning wheel
runout, and vibration-induced sensor movements. This is important, as the
Formula SAE Team has experienced sensor failure in the past due to contact
between the toning wheel and sensor. In the above assembly, the design gap
is .075 inches. Also, the magnets ensure reliability of the data, which is
absolutely essential to the system.
The Bosch Hall Effect sensor will be located by robust 4130 steel bracket as
shown. The steel bracket, although heavier than an aluminum or magnesium
counterpart, will conduct less heat from the brake caliper and also offers more
stiffness.
Material Thermal Conductivity (W/m*K) Modulus of Elasticity (GPa)

4130 Steel 42.7 205
6061-T6 Aluminum 167 69.8
AZ31B Magnesium 96 45
(matweb)
The bracket shall be welded from two separate pieces to facilitate fabrication.
It is located and constrained by existing brake caliper mounting bolts. This
design keeps the data acquisition components within the rim, providing some
margin of protection and maintains serviceability of the wheel bearing jam
nuts. The data cable will be run with the brake line along the lower forward a-
arm tube.
Six targets were chosen for the toning wheel based on several considerations.
First, the team referenced CDS documentation for target recommendations. It
was devoid of engineering guidelines, recommending anywhere from one to
three targets as sufficient for all measurements. Clearly, the greater the
number of targets, the better the data resolution, which becomes especially
important at low speeds. More targets also affords the ability to quickly detect
wheel spin. Wheel spin can be determined by a difference between front and
rear wheel speeds. The danger of numerous targets is, at high wheel RPM, the
50
target’s tangential velocity and/or frequency can exceed the sensor’s

capabilities causing missed targets and erroneous data. The Formula SAE
Team was able to provide valuable assistance in determining the required
resolution for this application. Based on previous testing, the team
determined that 4 targets on a 3.940 inch diameter wheel provided adequate
data resolution throughout the range of racecar speeds.
Since Bosch Hall Effect sensor technical specifications were denied to the
team, the specifications for an equivalent Honeywell sensor was used to
evaluate the six target toning wheel. Honeywell recommends a 25 target, 4
inch diameter, steel toning wheel for general shaft speed measurements. The
sensor is capable of reliable measurements up to 3600 RPMs of this wheel.
Quick hand calculations using vtangential = ω*r, yield the maximum target
tangential velocity of 754 in/sec and maximum target frequency of 1500 Hz.
With the existing transmission and final drive gear ratios, the maximum
possible speed of the racecar, rounded up, is 100 MPH. Given the tire’s
loaded radius (10.000 inches) and toning wheel diameter (4.306 inches), hand
calculations show a 100 MPH vehicle speed corresponds to 1681 RPM of the
toning wheel, target tangential velocity of 379 in/sec, and target frequency of
168 Hz. Clearly, a six target toning wheel of this size will run well within the
capabilities of the competing Bosch sensor. Thus, the final decision lied in
the compromise between required resolution and toning wheel
mass/complexity. Based on the above considerations and Formula SAE
advice, the team judged six targets to be a reasonable design for this
application.
51
Rear Wheel Speed Sensor
Rear Outboard Suspension Assembly

(data acquisition components highlighted in green)
52
Detail View
The first thought was to use an identical or at least similar front and rear
toning wheel design. However, sensor mounting considerations and the
geometry of the rear outboard suspension, a-arms, and constant velocity (CV)
joint forced the team to devise a more compact packaging solution. The rear
toning wheel is of similar construction to the front – a machined magnesium
with bonded magnets for targets. It is located by slip fit over a machined
diameter on the outside of the CV. The rear toning wheel assembly will be
permanently attached via setscrews, which will seat into a mating drilled hole
in the CV housing and be retained from unintentional loosening with Loctite
threadlocker. The team was concerned that steel set screws, although smaller
than the magnets, could excite the sensor as false targets and corrupt the data.
After considering alternative mountings, it was determined that setscrew was
the best method. Aluminum setscrews will be strong, durable, and should
53
eliminate the possibility of data problems. Screws of the proper size in 7075
aluminum are available from fastener-express.com at $0.10 each.
As in the front, 6 targets will be used. Here, due to the smaller toning wheel
diameter, target tangential velocity is 213 in/sec and target frequency is 168
Hz at 100 MPH vehicle speed. The sensor to target gap is 0.053 inches by
design. The goal was to retain the same generous 0.075 inch gap as the front
toning wheel. However, this was not possible due to packaging limitations on
the size of the toning wheel and concerns for fabrication simplicity of the
sensor bracket. The sensor bracket is machined from 0.125 inch thick 6061-
T6 aluminum plate. Aluminum was chosen due to its density, stiffness,
machineability, and availability. The team judged that steel was not required
for adequate stiffness due to the small size of the bracket. A single 10-32
button head cap screw with nylon lock nut will retain the bracket to the
suspension camber shoe. To facilitate mounting of the bracket in the proper
rotational orientation, a 0.125 inch reamed hole will be machined through the
bracket tangent to the face of the camber shoe. With the assistance of a dowel
pin, the bracket can be easily assembled in the proper orientation. This
ensures that the Hall Effect sensor will be located in the center of the toning
wheel, the best location for reliable measurements.
Differential Case Speed

The differential case speed will be measured via another Bosch Hall Effect
Sensor. This time, however, fabrication of a toning wheel is not required.
The 6 magnet targets will be bonded onto the face of the aluminum roller
chain sprocket, which is bolted to the differential case. This design eliminates
additional parts, complexity, and weight. The final design of the sensor
bracket and sprocket are yet to be determined, pending Formula SAE vehicle
construction.
54
The choice of sampling rate on these Hall Effect sensors will be governed by
the vehicle speed of interest and the required data resolution. A simple
spreadsheet tool was created to assist the Formula SAE team in choosing an
appropriate sampling rate. The spreadsheet calculates the maximum
allowable sampling rate for a given vehicle speed.
HALL EFFECT SENSOR CALCULATOR
INPUTS
Vehicle Speed of Interest 100 MPH
FRONT WHEEL 3
Tire Loaded Radius 10.000 in
Toning Wheel Diameter 4.306 in
Number of Targets 6
REAR WHEEL
Tire Loaded Radius 10.000 in
Number of Targets 6
DIFFERENTIAL CASE
Number of Targets 6
OUTPUTS
FRONT WHEEL
Vtangential of target 379 in/sec
within sensor range? YES
Frequency of target 168 Hz
Maximum Sampling Rate 168 Hz
REAR WHEEL
DIFFERENTIAL CASE
55
5.2.4. Vehicle Dynamics
Sponsor Needs:
The RIT Formula SAE Team requires knowledge of the inertial properties of
the racecar under all dynamic conditions. These inertial properties include
roll, yaw, and pitch rates as well as X, Y, and Z accelerations. This data is
essential to developing a quantitative understanding of the vehicle’s dynamic
character. The roll, yaw, and pitch rate signals can be integrated to determine
associated angles, which is extremely useful feedback to the
chassis/suspension tuner and designer. Yaw rate and lateral acceleration
values are used to determine track maps and evaluate vehicle
understeer/oversteer balance. These sensors allow the measurement of a
number of a number of traditional vehicle performance metrics – understeer
gradient, g-g diagrams, and skidpad performance. The inertial sensors also
provide data for frequency response analysis, which is an essential tire testing
and evaluation procedure. Vertical accelerations of the sprung mass are useful
for ride analysis. Perhaps most important application is the quantitative
evaluation of chassis setup changes and thus suspension tuning using design
of experiments mentality. The result should be a stable, well-mannered
racecar that takes full advantage of available tire grip.

To conduct these inertial measurements, the team was limited by financial
constraints to one CDS single axis gyroscope and one CDS three axis
accelerometer. The single axis gyroscope can be mounted in different
orientations to measure roll, yaw, or pitch rates independently.
The gyroscope, CDS SEN-37, is a single axis solid-state rotational rate sensor.
This sensor was chosen for its compact size, durable waterproof design, and
high accuracy. Sensitivity is rated at 0.0222 volts/deg per second, with an
accuracy of +/- 1%. The sensor is powered by 5 volts DC, from the
Commander II, and outputs voltage values of 0.5 to 4.5 VDC, corresponding
56
to +/- 80 degrees per second. Vibration damping is provided by integrated

rubber isolation stud mounts, which are rigidly attached to the racecar chassis.
Sensor calibration is provided by Competition Data Systems. We do not have
the resources available at RIT to perform this calibration, and thus, we must
rely on values obtained from the manufacturer. For this particular application,
the team estimates that a sampling rate of 200 Hz will be adequately accurate,
although this is subject to test results. It is also recommended that the yaw
rate sensor and accelerometer be operated at the same sampling rates to
facilitate correlation between the data.
A Competition Data Systems SEN-28 three-axis accelerometer will be used to

measure lateral, longitudinal, and vertical accelerations of the racecar. This
accelerometer was chosen for its small size, durability, and the fact that it is
currently owned by RIT Formula SAE.
Internal components are housed within
a lightweight, robust anodized
aluminum case. The SEN-28 is a 3-
axis, silicon strain gauge type
accelerometer, with a 0-5 volt output
range. Silicon strain gauge sensors
are manufactured in a variety of
configurations, with each exhibiting
differing sensitivity characteristics.
Due to manufacturer confidentiality,
we were unable to obtain further
information with regards to this Silicon Strain Gauge Accelerometer Internals
particular sensor. However, for the purposes of this project, we have assumed
that the sensor is a Wheatstone-bridge configuration exhibiting suitable
performance characteristics. These are perhaps the most common production
grade silicon strain gauge accelerometers. According to the specifications
provided by CDS, this sensor is accurate to +/- 1%, with a 0.5% repeatability.
57
Sensor calibration is conducted at Competition Data Systems, eliminating the

need for additional calibration prior to installation. The CDS calibration is
easily confirmed by placing each face of the accelerometer on a true level
surface.
The most important consideration in mounting the gyroscope and

accelerometer is location in the racecar. Both must be mounted as close as
possible to the vehicle’s center of gravity. The accelerometer takes
measurements along three perpendicular axes, which are normal to the square
faces of the outside housing. Thus, the sensor must be mounted perfectly
perpendicular to the ground plane and carefully oriented rotationally. A 5
degree difference between the X-axis of the accelerometer and the car center
plane is considerable. This will cause a true 1G longitudinal acceleration to
register a 0.09G Y-axis measurement. Mounting locations fore or aft of the cg
will cause accelerometer measurements to be biased toward the motion on that
end of the racecar. Vertical locations above or below the center of gravity
will involve roll and pitch accelerations in addition to the desired longitudinal
and lateral values. Lateral placement error will induce analogous Z-axis
errors.
The attachment method for the accelerometer is also critical. Rigid

attachment to the chassis will cause the sensor to pollute good data with
meaningless engine and chassis vibration. Conversely, a flexible rubber
mount will cause error due to sensor float. It is generally accepted that Velcro
is a reasonable compromise, and this method is recommended by CDS. On
the Formula SAE car, the accelerometer will be mounted with industrial
Velcro. Two cap screws with nylon lock nuts (just barely tight) will provide
rotational orientation.
The gyroscope data can suffer from mounting error as well. Since this sensor
only measures rotational rate about a single axis, any misalignment between
58
the desired measurement axis of the racecar and the sensor axis will induce
error. In a dynamic situation, the sensor axis will be affected by sprung mass
pitch and roll angles. The team is currently investigating a calculated
correction for this type of error. It is general practice to mount a gyroscope on
rubber isolation mounts to assist in damping engine and chassis vibrations.
The Formula SAE Team was able to provide a measured location of the
racecar center of gravity:
Center of Gravity Location – RIT Formula SAE Racecar

FRONT
Z
X
Coordinates:
X= 33.120 in
Y= 0.000 in
Z= 12.083 in
59
Center of Gravity Location Shown by Red Arrow
Unfortunately, mounting both sensors at the vehicle center of gravity was not
practical. As can be seen in the picture above, the cg is very close to the
engine and exhaust headers. Due to the necessity of a firewall between the
engine and driver bays, this section of the racecar receives no cooling airflow.
Temperature concerns forced the team to locate sensors elsewhere. The team
judged that the best alternative was to maintain the longitudinal and lateral
position of the cg and raise the sensors vertically until packaging became
feasible. The resulting location is shown below:
60
Solid Model Assembly of Vehicle Dynamics Sensors (Shown in Green)
Significant care will be taken in the fabrication of the mounting plate to

ensure that both sensors are level and oriented appropriately when the racecar
is static on a level surface. If necessary, shims can be placed under the
baseplate mountings.
Accelerometer error caused by sprung mass motions can be partially corrected

through calculation. Correction to the lateral acceleration measurement due to
chassis roll:
MeasuredLateralG − sin( RollAngle)

ActualLateralG =
cos( RollAngle)
61
(Fey, Data Power)
For a 1.5G true lateral acceleration and the accelerometer initially level:
Chassis Roll Angle (deg) Error (G's)

1.0 0.017
2.0 0.034
3.0 0.050
4.0 0.066
5.0 0.081
This correction does not account for the roll acceleration that would be
captured in the measurement due to the vertical height of the sensor above the
cg. Differentiation of the roll rate data would provide the necessary value to
subtract from the lateral acceleration prior to angle correction. Identical
corrections should be made to longitudinal acceleration measurements to
account for chassis pitch angle and pitch acceleration. In addition, the vertical
acceleration measurement should be compensated for roll and pitch angle
induced errors.
The actual values of pitch and roll angles and accelerations for the Formula
SAE car are not known at this time. This data can be measured with either a
laser ride height system (not financially feasible) or 3-axis gyroscope.
Unfortunately, the team is currently limited to one single-axis gyroscope by
62
financial constraints. Thus, proper corrections to acceleration measurements

are not possible. The team plans to evaluate this question further when the
system is on the racecar by measuring roll and pitch rates independently and
quantifying the magnitude of the total error.
5.2.5. Suspension
Sponsor Needs:
RIT Formula SAE would like to pursue a damper development program with
the goals of determining optimal motion ratio and damping curves. The most
critical phase of this program is measuring damper performance under
dynamic conditions. On the Formula SAE racecar, the dampers are mounted
inboard to minimize unsprung mass. Damper actuation is achieved by a
pullrod attached to the upper a-arm and a bellcrank (rocker arm).
Formula SAE Inboard Dampers
63
Formula SAE Inboard Dampers (close up)

Four SEN20-2 linear potentiometers, supplied by Competition Data Systems,
will be used to determine damper position at each corner of the racecar. The
sensors measure displacement with a 5-volt infinite resolution, film type linear
potentiometer. They have been chosen based on their accuracy and
convenience – RIT Formula SAE already owns them. The SEN20 features an
anodized aluminum body with stainless steel shaft. One disadvantage to these
types of sensors is the fact that they are extremely fragile, and can be
mechanically damaged quite easily. The sensors are instantly destroyed if
over-stroking occurs in compression or rebound, as they are not robust enough
to bear load. Spherical rod ends are supplied on both ends of the sensor with
the intent to avoid binding within a limited range and the associated damaging
bending load in the sensor shaft. Another major concern with sensor
integration onto the racecar is utilizing the maximum amount of sensor
electrical travel for the required measurements. A large range of sensor
electrical output ensures the signal will not be confused with electrical noise.
This will guarantees the best accuracy and reliability of the data. The design
stroke was determined to be 75% of the maximum travel of the sensor to
provide a margin of safety. Calibration is 2-point linear – one point at full
compression (0 stroke) and one point at full extension (measure stroke with
vernier calipers).
64
SEN20 Displacement Sensor
Each linear potentiometer will record a stroke measurement. The Track

Master software can be configured to relate the linear potentiometer stroke to
vertical wheel travel. Damper position is then determined as a function of
wheel position. The resulting damper math channel can be differentiated to
determine shaft velocity and acceleration. Knowledge of the pullrod load and
coil-over spring rate essentially transform each corner of the racecar into a
damper dynamometer. The intermediate step, the vertical wheel travel, can be
used to determine approximate pitch and roll angles of the sprung mass.
Mitchell suspension analysis software was used to create a rigid body,

spherical joint kinematic model of the front and rear Formula SAE
independent suspension systems. The model can then be exercised in a
number of ways while monitoring selected suspension parameters.
65
Screenshot of Front Suspension Model
The kinematic model determines the stroke of the linear potentiometer over
the operating range of the suspension, given the potentiometer mounting
points. Calculation of this stroke is no trivial matter due to the complexity of
the 3-dimensional suspension geometry and the changes which occur with
vertical wheel travel (ride height). Several iterations of linear potentiometer
geometry were required to achieve the desired stroke. It is critical that a
constant linear relationship exist between linear potentiometer stroke and ride
height due to the restrictions of Track Master software. To relate the linear
potentiometer stroke to ride height, Track Master uses a hard-coded math
channel that will only accept a constant value. The same is true for the
relationship between damper travel and ride height. These relationships are
expressed as the ratios of ShaftStroke , which is called the “motion ratio.”
RideHeight
66
Track Master Car File
The appropriate motion ratio values are given by the slope of the plots
generated from the kinematic model output:
Linear Potentiometer and Damper Shaft Strokes

L_Pot
vs. Ride Height
Damper
1.500
Linear (L_Pot)
Linear (Damper)
y = 0.6085x
R2 = 0.9971
1.000
y = 0.4738x
R2 = 0.9965
0.500
Shaft Travel (in)
0.000
-2.500 -2.000 -1.500 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500
-0.500
-1.000
-1.500
Ride Height (in)
Front Suspension
67
Linear Potentiometer and Damper Shaft Strokes

L_pot vs. Ride Height
Damper 1.500
Linear (L_pot) y = 0.6392x
Linear (Damper) 2
R = 0.9983
1.000
y = 0.4285x
2
R = 0.998
0.500
Shaft Travel (in)
0.000
-2.500 -2.000 -1.500 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500
-0.500
-1.000
-1.500
Ride Height (in)
Rear Suspension
Integration of the linear potentiometers onto the racecar required much careful
thought. Optimizing sensor travel, meeting the stroke goals above, and
protection from track debris, and general packaging were paramount concerns.
Sensor mounting brackets need to be accurate, appropriately robust, and
preferably attached using existing fasteners. Significant effort was made
working with the Pro/Engineer solid model to achieve these aims.
Both the front and rear bellcrank end mounting brackets use the existing shock
end bolt as the sole fastener. Rotational orientation is achieved by utilizing
existing features of the bellcrank geometry. The tub mount (chassis end) of
the front and rear sensors are mounted to machined magnesium brackets that
mount utilizing existent racecar fasteners.
68
General Location of Linear Potentiometers
69
Front Suspension Detail

(brackets and sensor highlighted in green)
Rear Suspension Detail

(brackets and sensor highlighted in green)
70
5.2.6. Steering
Sponsor Needs:
The RIT Formula SAE Team requested data on driver steering inputs. This
can be correlated to the inside and outside tire steer angles. The steering
wheel angle can be a revealing parameter for driver training purposes as well
as vehicle dynamic analysis such as understeer/oversteer balance and skidpad
performance. This year’s racecar will allow for adjustable Ackermann
steering geometry. The data collected will be invaluable for tuning purposes.

The team chose to use an existing Formula SAE sensor, since it was low cost
and available. The SEN38 is spring-loaded string potentiometer, used for
displacement measurements. This particular sensor uses a .035” stainless steel
cable, with a displacement range of 0-9 inches. All components are sealed
within a 1.25” OD rigid plastic housing. A reasonable approximation of
steering wheel angle can be obtained by calibrating the sensor through the
following method. By securely fastening a digital level/protractor to the flat
portion at the bottom of the steering wheel and turning the wheel left and right
to its limits, we can calibrate steering wheel angle. However, a more useful
metric for characterizing vehicle behavior is to determine the actual road
wheel (tire) steer angle. Calibration is done thought the use of rotating setup
(“Weaver”) plates. One plate is set under each front tire and zeroed. Then,
the steering wheel is set at a series of angles (measured by the digital
level/protractor) and both front wheel angles are recorded. This yields a
relationship between the steering wheel angle and the inside and outside road
wheel angles. This will then be incorporated into a math channel.
Integration of the sensor into the racecar presented some packaging

challenges. This type of sensor is usually used to measure linear displacement
of the steering rack. However, this was not feasible due to the steering
component layout and interference with the bodywork. Driver ergonomic
71
considerations were also important. The mounting arrangement below uses a

cam to wrap the sensor cable as the steering wheel turns. This setup was easy
to tune, via the cam diameter, to utilize 75% of the sensor’s mechanical and
electrical travel. Both the cam and clamping brackets will be machined from
6061-T6 aluminum.
Steering Angle Sensor Shown in Green
Steering Angle Sensor - Detail
72
5.2.7. Corner Loads
Sponsor Needs:
The Formula SAE Team expressed the desire to monitor the vertical loads on
each tire during dynamic racecar maneuvers. This will allow the direct
measurement of load transfer, which can be used to tune understeer/oversteer
balance, quantify the effect of spring rate and anti-roll bar rate changes, and
evaluate transient vehicle behavior. Dynamic corner weights will also assist
in tire and brake pad coefficient of friction measurements while providing a
wealth of information for future racecar structural design.
The most practical method to measure the vertical load on each tire is to relate
this load to a chassis/suspension force that is easy to measure. On the
Formula SAE car, the most logical related load is the force in the suspension
pullrod.
Front Suspension Pullrods (shown by red arrows)
73
The pullrod is a tension link that connects the upper a-arm to the inboard coil-
over damper at each corner. Due to the spherical rod end bearings on each
end and the nature of the installation, each pullrod is always loaded in pure
tension under racing conditions. The only exception to this would be an
airborne situation where a wheel is completely unloaded and traveled into full
rebound. Under these conditions, the pullrod would be loaded in compression
due to supporting the unsprung mass.

The team immediately recognized that load cells would be a convenient and
effective method of measuring the force in each pullrod. However, load cells
appropriate for the anticipated force range proved to be outside the project
budget. The team then turned to a more cost-effective solution – the strain
gage.
Strain Gage Basics

The strain gage is the most common method of measuring strain, with the
bonded metallic strain gage being the most often preferred. The metallic strain
gage contains a fine wire or metallic foil that makes up a grid pattern. This
grid pattern is arranged to maximize the amount of metallic wire or foil to
strain in the parallel direction while at the same time to minimize the cross-
sectional area of the grid. This helps to reduce or eliminate the affect of shear
strain and Poisson strain. The gage is mounted to the test specimen via the
carrier, which is a thin backing. Therefore any strain undergone by the test
specimen is transferred directly through the carrier to the metallic grid. Thus
the strain gage is simply an electrical resistor that undergoes a linear change in
resistance when subjected to a mechanical strain.
74
Selection Parameters
Important criteria when selecting a strain gage include gage length, pattern,
resistance, material, and installation.
Gage length is the strain sensitive length of the gage. Gages can be as short as
0.008 in and as long as 4 in, however common lengths range from 0.125 in –
0.25 in. In our case the gages we choose should be at least ¼ inch in length.
This provides for a quicker and easier installation because these longer gages
are not as delicate and easier to handle. A longer gage will also dissipate heat
better under cyclic loading conditions and is less expensive than the shorter
gages.
Uni-axial or multi-axial and planar or stacked are terms that define a gage’s
grid number and layout, respectively. For our situation uni-axial gages
arranged in planar layouts will be sufficient. Uni-axial gages are less
expensive than multi-axial gages and the planar layout will increase the
accuracy and stability of our system.
Strain gages are most commonly found with resistances of 120Ω, 350Ω, and
1000Ω. The higher the resistance of the gage, then the higher the sensitivity of
the gage to strain. Because our anticipated strain is so small, approximately
132µε, the gage resistance should be at least 350Ω.
The gage factor is an important characteristic of the strain gage. This number
represents a strain gage’s overall sensitivity to strain. While most suppliers
give this number when marketing their gage, it is important for the consumer
to know the metal that the gage is composed of. Isoelastic alloy is commonly
used in applications that require dynamic measurements. It has a high gage
factor, approximately 3.6, which increases the signal-to-noise ratio and allows
for our desired 350Ω resistance. The drawback to this alloy is that its’ extreme
75
sensitivity to temperature changes. This sensitivity can be reduced

dramatically by using a half-bridge circuit, which will be discussed later.
The carrier and adhesive materials are important factors as well. Because we
will be testing under dynamic conditions a glass fiber reinforced epoxy
backing is recommended for the carrier. Polymide is the “standard” carrier
material, but it is desirable only for static loading. An epoxy is also suggested
for the adhesive compound because of its high bond strength.
It is common practice for suppliers to offer options for their strain gages.
These options are not necessary, but they can ease installation as well as
protect the gage from the environment. These options can include: built-in
solder dots, pre-attached lead wire cables, integral terminals, encapsulation,
and individual furnished resistance values.
Strain Gage Measurement
Measuring strain requires accurate measurement of very small changes in

resistance. For instance, we expect the pull-rod to undergo roughly 132µε. An
isoelastic alloy gauge with a GF of 3.6 will show a change in electrical
resistance of only 3(500E-06) = 0.0475%. This is equivalent to a resistive
change of only 0.17Ω for a 350Ω strain gage.
76
The diagram below shows the general Wheatstone Bridge configuration. This
allows the user to measure these small changes in resistance.
With VO equal to:
⎡ R3 R2 ⎤
VO = ⎢ − ⎥ × VEX
⎣ 3
R + R 4 R1 + R 2 ⎦
The bridge is said to be balanced (VO = 0) when R1/R2 = R4/R3. Therefore any
change in the resistance of any arm of the bridge will produce a nonzero
output voltage. We can take advantage of this by replacing R4 with a strain
gage (RG + ∆R) and letting R1 = R2 = R3 = RG. Now when the test specimen
undergoes a strain the resistance of the strain gage changes and the bridge
produces an output voltage:
⎛ ⎞
VO GF × ε ⎜⎜ 1 ⎟
⎟
=−
VEX 4 ⎜ GF ×ε ⎟
⎜1+ ⎟
⎝ 2 ⎠
This is known as the Quarter-Bridge circuit configuration. There are two key
drawbacks when using a quarter-bridge. The first is that the (1 + GF x ε/2)
term in the output equation informs us that we are dealing with a nonlinear
response. The second drawback is the circuit’s sensitivity to temperature
changes. This effect can be minimized by using what is referred to as an
inactive, “dummy” gage. Because this dummy gage undergoes the same
77
temperature fluctuations as the active gage, the ratio of their resistances, as

well as VO, do not change. By taking this one step further and making the
dummy gage an active strain gage we can not only eliminate the nonlinear
term but also double the output of the bridge, which leads us to the Half-
Bridge Circuit:
Further consideration must be given to the lead wires because they add offset
error and desensitize the bridge. Lead wire resistance, RL, can be measured
and compensated for in the strain calculations. Once again, temperature
changes come back to haunt us. To eliminate the alterations in RL due to
temperature changes it becomes necessary to utilize what is known as a 3-wire
connection. Part (b) of the below figure indicates that any change in RL2 will
not affect the ratio of the bridge legs R3 and RG, effectively eliminating
changes in resistance to due temperature.
78
Signal Conditioning
The basic concepts of strain gage measurement would leave one to believe
that it is a relatively simple “plug-n-play” type system. Unfortunately this is
far from the truth. Proper and accurate strain measurements can only be
achieved by careful selection of specific signal conditioning elements that
involve the following: bridge completion, excitation, remote sensing,
amplification, filtering, offset, and Shunt calibration.
Bridge completion is basically self-explanatory. It involves the use of high-
precision reference resistors (R1 & R2) to form a completion network of the
half-bridge circuit. By letting R2 = 350Ω and building R1 as a series
connection of a 300Ω resistor and 100Ω trim pot, this can be adjusted to offset
the bridge output to zero volts when there is no strain being applied. The
justification of the large trim pot is a precaution to avoid burning the pot itself
out in the instance there is a need to deviate far from the total 350Ω’s of
resistance.
The next area of concern is the excitation voltage. Common voltage levels
range from 3V to 10V. Anything higher than 10V can cause errors due to self-
heating. The CDS unit will produce a constant, regulated 5 or 10V excitation
voltage, in the range of the industry standard.
Just as lead wire resistance is an issue in the connection of the strain gauges to
the bridge, it is an issue with the connection of the excitation supply to the
bridge. There can be a significant voltage drop due to the length of the wires
as well as changes in resistance due to temperature. Because VO is an
important component of the measurement we must be confident that the
bridge is receiving the exact excitation voltage that we are using in our
calculations. This excitation voltage can be regulated by the use of remote
79
sensing wires. These remote sensing wires use negative feedback amplifiers to
make the appropriate adjustments to compensate for lead losses.
The CDS unit requires that the input signal from our strain sensor be in the 0-
5V range. However, output from the bridge will only be a few milivolts.
Further research directed us to Analog Devices where we found their
precision instrumentation amplifier, AD8230. This unit has an adjustable gain
from 1 – 1000 giving us the required 0-5V output signal.
Electronic noise may also be an issue. Fortunately the AD8230 has inherent
filtering capabilities as well as a low-pass filter included in its’ wiring diagram
(See Analog Devices AD8230 data in technical data package).
The final step in completing a working strain sensor involves Shunt

calibration. By replacing a large resistor of known value in series along one of
the arms of the bridge a known ∆R is generated. This will act as a simulation
of an applied strain to the test specimen and produce an output voltage that
can be measured and compared to anticipated results.
Preliminary Design
Below is a preliminary design of what our strain gage circuit will resemble.
This diagram does not include a remote sensing feature because we are not
quite certain of how much the excitation voltage will be affected by voltage
drop caused by wire distance and resistance variations due to temperature
fluctuations. If this does turn out to be a concern then a remote sensing circuit
with negative feed back amplifiers will need to be developed.
80
The measured pullrod loads must be correlated with the actual vertical load on
the tire. The same Mitchell kinematic models used for the suspension
potentiometer analysis were applied here. The simulation was used to find the
correlation between the tire normal load and the pullrod load in the front and
rear suspensions. It is a simple matter to have the program calculate the
pullrod force given a tire normal load. (The ability of the Mitchell software to
calculate this type of load has been validated by RIT Formula SAE in the past
through hand calculations and comparison to another simulation program.)
However, there is a complicating factor in the relationship between these two
forces – the vertical position of the wheel (ride height). Depending on the
suspension geometry, the relationship between tire normal load and pullrod
force could be dependent on ride height. This dependence is due to the
changing geometry of the suspension system with wheel travel. To quantify
the magnitude of such a relationship, a sweep of anticipated tire normal loads
was conducted at several different ride height positions for both the front and
rear suspensions.
For the front suspension, three ride height positions were analyzed – ride
height = 0, -1, and +2. This is the full operating range of suspension wheel
travel. The results at ride height = +2 are shown in the table and plot below:
Vertical Wheel Force (lbf) Pullrod Force (lbf) % Difference

0 0 0.0
50 121 -7.6
100 243 -7.6
150 364 -7.6
200 485 -7.6
250 607 -7.6
300 728 -7.6
350 850 -7.5
400 971 -7.6
450 1092 -7.6
480 1165 -7.6
Front Suspension at Ride Height = +2
81
Force Relationship between Pullrod and Vertical Wheel

Ride Height = +2
1400
1200
1000
Pullrod Force (lbf)
y = 2.4272x
2
800 R =1
600
400
200
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Vertical Wheel Force Fz (lbf)
As expected, the relationship is constant and perfectly linear. The slope of the
above plot, PullrodForce(lbf ) , is referred to as the force relationship,
VerticalWheelForce(lbf )
which is unique for each ride height position. The percent difference is a
comparison between the pullrod load at ride height = +2 and ride height = 0.
The summary of results at each ride height is summarized below:
Ride Height (in) Force Relationship (lbf/lbf) Average % Difference

-1 2.7148 3.4
0 2.6268 0.0
2 2.4272 -7.6
Front Suspension
82
Force Relationship as f(ride height)

4
3.5
Force Relationship (lbf/lbf)

3
2.5
2 y = -0.0964x + 2.6217
R2 = 0.9991
1.5
0.5
0
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Ride Height (in)
Thus, the actual vertical load on the tire will be calculated by:
1
VerticalTireLoad = MeasuredPullrodLoad *
[− .0964 * ( RideHeight ) + 2.6217]
This equation will be programmed into Trackmaster as a math channel to

yield the normal tire load for left and right front wheels. The ride height value
will come from the respective suspension linear potentiometer.
The rear suspension force relationship is slightly different than the front. This
can be attributed to entirely different geometry. Especially influential here is
the change in the angle of the pullrod relative to the ground plane as ride
height changes. This characteristic is mainly driven by the inboard damper
and bellcrank geometry. Since the front and rear suspension differ in this
regard, the following result is reasonable.
83
Ride Height (in) Force Relationship (lbf/lbf) Average % Difference

-1 4.0174 0.1
0 4.0135 0
1 3.9464 -1.7
2 3.8306 -4.5
Rear Suspension
Force Relationship as f(ride height)

5
4.8
4.6
Force Relationship (lbf/lbf)
4.4
4.2
3.8
y = -0.0914x + 4.0216
3.6
R2 = 0.9769
3.4
3.2
3
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Ride Height (in)
As you can see, the force relationship is a piece-wise linear function. It is

constant in the range of ride height 0 to –1 and a linear fit though the positive
ride height region. Thus, the math channel equation for the left and right rear
wheels will be written:
⎡ ⎡ 1 ⎤ ⎤
⎢ RideHeight ≤ 0, ⎢ MeasuredPu llrodLoad * 4.0155 ⎥, ⎥
⎣ ⎦
VerticalTi reLoad = IF ⎢ ⎥
⎢⎡ 1 ⎤⎥
⎢ ⎢ MeasuredPu llrodLoad *
⎣⎣ [− .0194 * ( RideHeight ) + 4.0216]⎥⎦⎥⎦
84
5.2.8. Engine
Sponsor Needs:
The RIT Formula SAE Racing Team currently uses an Autronic SM2 engine
management system on its Honda CBR600F2 motorcycle engine. Essential
input parameters which are required by this are throttle position, Air/Fuel
ratio, manifold air pressure (MAP), crankshaft speed, and camshaft speed.
The Autronic SM2 has several user-programmable features for engine tuning.
These include tuning the fuel map multipliers based upon load and air/fuel
ratio. In addition, RIT Formula SAE would like to implement closed-loop
control of the engine system. This can be done by feeding data collected from
an O2 sensor to the ECU in real time. One requirement which the sponsor
placed on us is that we utilize some, if not all of the current sensors which
they have been running. This is due to the fact that they are proven to be
highly accurate and robust in this application.
In addition to essential tuning parameters, the engine group would like to
better quantify several cooling system parameters. Useful data should be
collected for water and air temperatures on both sides of the radiator, and flow
rate through the radiator. This data will be used to optimize cooling system
design and verify heat transfer calculations.

Several factors were considered when assessing how to monitor engine
parameters. The first problem which we faced was how to deal the excessive
heat that is produced within the engine compartment. Compounding this is
the tight packaging constraints within the engine bay itself. This is due to
chassis structure optimization around the engine. Due to these factors,
considerations were made to safeguard all components from heat. Every
effort will be made to rout sensor cabling away from high heat areas. In areas
where this is not feasible, silicone coated fiberglass hose (FireSleeve) will be
used to insulate cables.
85
Beginning with the air inlet at the

throttle body, a Bosch RP86 Rotary
Potentiometer is used to provide
angular throttle position. Power is
supplied by the main vehicle wiring
harness. This sensor is well suited
for the data acquisition system,
providing a 0-5 volt output signal,
Bosch RP86 Rotary Potentiometer
which is readily accepted by the
Commander II. One problem faced by the sponsor is an aging O2 sensor and
wideband control unit. Currently the team monitors A/F with an NTK L1H1
UEGO wideband O2 sensor, which is controlled through the B Model
Autronic Exhaust Gas Analyzer. This system is a proprietary unit sold by
Autronic, and retails for $1800. Both the sensor, and the controller are in poor
condition, and have not been providing consistent readings. With the
budgetary concerns in mind, the formula team is looking to upgrade to a more
reliable and smaller unit. A control box is necessary for all wideband O2
sensors, and must be installed on the vehicle each time the O2 sensor is
present.
Extensive research was conducted to determine how we could control a

wideband O2 sensor without the Autronic analyzer, and still produce accurate
results. Two features which are needed for this type of system are a 0-5V
linear output to the Commander II, and a 0-1V linear output to the ECU. This
will allow Commander II to record Air/Fuel ratio simultaneously with other
engine parameters, and the Autronic ECU to operate on closed-loop control
via the 0-1V input. This 0-1 volt input is related to A/F through calibrations
provided by Autronic. Based upon industry and motorsports research, we
have determined that there are two sensors which are used by a large majority
of engine management manufacturers and race teams. These are the NTK
L1H1 UEGO, and the Bosch LSU-4. Both sensors are 5 wire wideband pump
86
cell oxygen sensors, which are used by several OEM automobile

manufacturers. Of the two, the NTK is a slightly higher quality laboratory
grade sensor. Its accuracy has been found to be about 1.5% better than that of
the Bosch LSU-4. However, the main disadvantage to the NTK is that it is
much more expensive than the Bosch. The LSU-4 can be purchased for as
low as $58, compared to $329 for the NTK. After assessing the costs and
small difference in accuracy, we have determined that the Bosch LSU-4 is the
most feasible for this project. The following excerpt, obtained from Tech
Edge, offers an explanation of how the Bosch LSU-4 pump cell oxygen sensor
works.
The Bosch LSU sensor requires a
controller because it is more
complex than a standard switching
type sensor. It can be thought of as
being made up of a heated
narrow band oxygen sensor
(comprising the Reference cell &
Nernst Cell in the image) coupled
to a pump cell in contact with a
small chamber with a diffusion
gap to the outside (exhaust gas).
The electronics (in the WB unit
case) are represented by the
yellow (op-amp) and green
(resistor) symbols. The actual
electronics is much more complex
and not shown is the feedback
loop that maintains the heater to a
precise temperature.
The pump cell, in conjunction
with a catalytic reaction at the
surface of the cell's electrodes, can
either consume oxygen or
consume hydrocarbon fuel in the
pump cell cavity, depending on
the direction of the Ip current
flow.
During normal sensor operation, a
87
small sample of the exhaust gas

passes through the diffusion gap
into the pump cell. That exhaust
gas is either rich or lean and both
conditions are sensed by the
reference cell which produces a
voltage Vs above or below the
Vref signal (this voltage has the
characteristics of a narrow band
switching type sensor as shown
in the image below left).
A rich exhaust will produce a high
Vs voltage and the electronics
produces a pump current Ip in one
direction to consume the free fuel.
A lean exhaust produces a low Vs
and the electronics sends the pump
current in the opposite direction to
consume free oxygen.
When the free oxygen or free fuel
has been neutralised, the Vs
feedback signal goes to about 450
mVolts (the same as the Vref
value). The pump current (which
is a measure of the number of
electrons used in the chemical
reaction) required to produce this
equilibrium is a measure of the
Lambda or Air Fuel Ratio. The
electronics in the WB unit
converts the Ip into a number of
signals including a Linear
Voltage which is the output of the
WB unit. Not shown is the Rcal,
or calibration resistor, in the
sensor's connector which
compensates for manufacturing
variations between sensors.
88
Wideband O2 controllers are manufactured in a variety of configurations, with

several use options. Some controllers have additional data acquisition
capabilities built into the controller, as well as LCD displays, and even
wireless download options. For our application, the three primary concerns
are with size, weight, and the above-mentioned input-output parameters. Our
initial thought was that we could design and manufacture our own custom
controller for the LSU-4 sensor. However, after assessing our resource and
schedule feasibility, we determined that it would be in the best interest of the
project to purchase a proven production model. Each manufacturer we
initially investigated marketed units which were well beyond our desired
product. Several units have on-board data logging, displays, and several other
options which are not necessary for our application. Further research did
however result in a wideband controller that affords us every option needed,
with no unnecessary extras. The WBo2 2CO wideband controller is
manufactured by Tech Edge, an Australian-based company specializing in
wideband oxygen sensors and controllers. The 2CO is a credit card sized unit
with outputs for both the ECU and data logger. In addition, the 2CO is
designed for exclusive use with the LSU-4 wideband sensor. Features of this
unit include its compact size, light weight, and internal filtering of wideband
heater switching and vehicle generated electrical noise. In addition, the unit
can be purchased for under $300, as a complete kit, including wiring.
WBo2 2CO Specifications

• 3.54” x 1.97” x 0.98” Outside Dimensions
• Durable ABS Plastic Housing
• Internal Noise Filtering
• 0-1 volt Simulated Narrowband Output to ECU
• 0-5 volt Linear Wideband Output to DAQ
• Compatible With Bosch LSU-4 O2 Sensor
WBo2 2CO Wideband Unit and Bosch LSU-4 Sensor
89
The primary method employed by RIT Formula SAE for determination of

engine load is through the use of a manifold air pressure sensor (MAP), which
is internal to Autronic. The main disadvantage to this set-up is that the ECU
is unable to output this data. Thus, an external MAP sensor must be used in
conjunction to the Autronic MAP sensor. For this application, we have
proposed using the SEN-39 Pressure Sensor, available from Competition Data
Systems. This is a small, lightweight absolute pressure sensor which has a
range from 0 to full vacuum. The sensor can be
mounted near the intake manifold of the vehicle.
Pressures can be logged by both the ECU and
Commander II, through the use of a tee in the
plumbing exiting the intake. The sensor can be
SEN39 Pressure Sensor
calibrated in PSI, mm of Hg, inches of water, or % load.
When evaluating how to collect engine speed data, we turned to the method
used by RIT Formula SAE on their CBR600F2 engines. Engine RPM
readings are obtained from a Bosch HA-P speed sensor, which is excited by a
trigger wheel on the crankshaft. The output signal is then fed to the ECU and
tachometer. This is by far the most accurate and proven method for obtaining
engine speed, and thus we have proposed a similar design for this application
to that of the throttle position. The sensor will be powered through the main
vehicle wiring harness, and the signal will be output to the ECU, tachometer
and Commander II.
90
6. References
Micronas: Hall Effect Sensor. Micronas. 13 Feb. 2005.

<http://www.micronas.com/products/overview/sensors/details/sensor4.php>
Ramsden, Ed. Hall vs. VR: Which speed sensor is wrong for you? Electronic Products.
13 Feb. 2005. <http://www.electronicproducts.com/ShowPage.asp?SECTION=
3700&PRIMID=&FileName=OCTCHE1.oct2000>
Robert Bosch Corporation – Bosch – USA. 28 Jan. 2005.

<http://www.boschusa.com/AutoOrigEquip/Sensors/ProdExhSensors/>
Home. Competition Data Systems. 16 Dec. 2004. <http://www.competitiondata.com>
Milliken, William F. and Douglas L. Milliken. Race Car Vehicle Dynamics. Pittsburg:
SAE International, 1995.
Fey, Buddy. Data Power: Using Racecar Data Acquisition. Memphis: Towery
Publishing, 1993.
Matweb – The Online Materials Information Resource. Matweb 18 Jan. 2005.

<www.matweb.com>
Honeywell – Sensing and Control Catalog. Honeywell Sensing and Control. 16 Jan.
2005.
<http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/prodinfo/solidstate/catalog/c20052.pdf>
Measuring Strain with Strain Gauges. National Instruments. 12 Jan. 2005.

<http://zone.ni.com>
Principles of Selecting Strain Gages. eFunda, Inc. 11 Feb. 2005.

<http://www.efunda.com>
Tech Reports. Wm. C. Mitchell Software. 12 Dec. 2004.

<http://www.mitchellsoftware.com/tech_reports.htm>
Kempski, Mark. Personal interview. 21 Jan. 2005.
Wellin, John. Personal interview. 4 Feb. 2005.
91

RIT Formula SAE Data Acquisition System

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RIT Formula SAE Data Acquisition System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Senior Design Team 05109

RIT Formula SAE Data Acquisition System

Dr. Alan Nye

Justin LaChausse – Project Leader

Robert Doll – Chief Engineer

John Howard Jr.

Hsiang Chi (Sean) Hui

1. RECOGNIZE AND QUANTIFY NEED 4

5.2.4. VEHICLE DYNAMICS 56

• DAQ – Data Acquisition

1. Recognize and Quantify Need

1.1. Company Background

1.2. Mission Statement

1.3. DAQ Description

1.4. Product Description

1.5. Scope Limitations

• Functioning DAQ System

1.6. Stake Holders

1.7. Key Business Goals

1.8.2.2. Components must be completely removable without affecting the

1.9. Financial Analysis

RIT Senior Design Team 05109 Budget

Line # Vendor Description Item Total Line Total

Equipment Purchases Under $1500

Equipment Purchases Over $1500

TOTAL EXPENSES $ 7,953.52

Competition Data Systems Sponsorship $ 2,383.00

TOTAL INCOME $ 3,383.00

TOTAL ACCOUNT STANDING $ 4,570.52

Table 1.9 – Project Budget

2. Existing Electrical System

2.1. Overview of Current System

Autronic SM2 ECU Specifications

2.2. Areas of Concern

3.1. DAQ Concept Development

3.1.1. DAQ Concept Development Process

3.1.2. Concept 1 – “Long List”

o Steering Wheel Angle

• Remote Torque Sensors

3.1.3. Concept 2 – “Baseline System”

• Hall Effect Sensor

3.1.4. Concept 3/4 – “Intermediate/Hybrid”

setups, depending on testing goals. This includes a baseline competition

The following list includes simultaneous logging requirements, as well as

3.2. Electrical System Concept Development

4.1. System Level Assessment

Setup 1 Setup 2 Setup 3

Table 4.1 – System Level Feasibility Results

DAQ System Level Feasibility Assessment

Figure 4.1 – System Level Feasibility Assessment

steps before useful data could be analyzed. From an economic standpoint, we

4.2. Sensor Level Assessment

The remaining desired vehicle parameters left to be evaluated included those

1. Does this sensor add significant weight to the vehicle?

Technology Economics Performance Schedule

Figure 4.2 - CDS Informer Video Data Overlay System

method is to take measurements on the steering column. This is due to packaging

The assessment of how to measure dynamic corner loads came down to

5.1. Electrical System

manufacturer show that the fan draws 8

slightly more than 50 amps when cranking

calculated from specifications of the rectifier and alternator. In all current

Figure 3: Hydrometer (source: popular mechanics)